Following an off-duty incident, PSC conducted an investigation in which a subject officer was found to have: The PSC investigator prepared a discipline brief but did not formally recommend any action, instead opting to submit the brief to the DAU within PSC for consideration of sanctions/outcome. Of the 27 files classified as work files (C1-0), auditors considered that: Consideration of complaint histories was inconsistent across the files included in the audit. not appearing to record a determination in the file, while ROCSID recorded determinations of substantiated or not finalised (two files). a sergeant who had a proven discipline charge (from 2009) and a recent substantiated determination for predatory behaviour (from 2016). Did timing of reclassification adversely affect notification and/or investigation? A targeted DAT form indicated that the subject officer was directed to provide breath and urine samples. Was the investigation reviewed by a supervisor? Of the 12 files that did not contain evidence to indicate that a final outcome letter was sent to the complainant: Of the 46 files that formally identified subject officers, 22 contained documents that indicated a final outcome letter was sent to the subject officers. IBAC acknowledges that Victoria Police is reviewing its complaint handling and discipline system as part of its response to the Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission Independent review into sex discrimination and sexual harassment, including predatory behaviour, in Victoria Police. overstated the number of allegations in ROCSID (two files). Was a formal investigation plan prepared from the outset? . The audit identified that human rights were not adequately dealt with in 20 files (34 per cent). An anonymous complaint alleged that an off-duty officer avoided a speeding ticket (for travelling at 114 km per hour in a 60 zone) by providing a false story. Tel (national information service): 1300 656 419 (Monday to Friday, 10 am to 1.30 pm) Web: https://humanrights.gov.au. Victoria Police is obliged to notify IBAC of complaints received about corrupt conduct or police personnel misconduct by a Victoria Police employee or police recruit.22 In practice, an automated email is sent to IBAC by Victoria Police when a file is classified as a notifiable C2-1, C3-2, C3-3 or C3-4 complaint. It notes that compliance by investigators is three-fold: As a result of recommendations IBAC made in its 2016 audit of Victoria Polices complaint handling at the regional level, PSC advised a new program is being developed to replace the Integrity Management Program and that associated resources would include a more detailed component on human rights in the context of complaint investigations. A file that listed one allegation of criminal association but failed to list an allegation of unauthorised comment. Of the 59 files in the sample 10 were reclassified. A report was made to police about an aggravated burglary. While the investigation failed to discuss a prior assault in the subject officers complaint history, the investigator ultimately recommended disciplinary action. If no: Reason for disagreeing with reclassification. In a matter that involved a total extension period of 534 days: the first extension request was made two months after the initial 152-day time frame expired for a C3-4, the second request was made six months after the first extension expired. The VPM complaint management and investigations guidelines states if action against the employee is required, the investigator should recommend that action is required. In the following matter, a DHHS officer lodged a complaint after a young person reported that he had been assaulted in custody. While no formal recommendations were made, a number of investigations identified did highlight important issues and suggested practical solutions that warranted broader organisational consideration as discussed in case studies 25 and 26. Auditors were only able to identify investigation plans for two of the 10 files that contained a criminal or disciplinary brief. work files are reclassified, notified to IBAC and progress to a full investigation in a timely manner, occuring as soon as notifiable complaint allegations are identified (ie not upon closure of the matter). The fact that clear allegations of traffic offences raised in this complaint namely, reckless driving, speeding and drink driving were not recorded in ROCSID raises questions about the accuracy of the data more generally. Despite these similarities, Victoria Police did not deal with these subject officers in a consistent manner, as discussed in case studies 22 and 23. It is good practice for police to seek the opinion of the OPP as early as possible where there appears to be substance to an allegation that a police officer has committed a criminal offence.50, PSCs Investigations Division includes a dedicated Discipline Advisory Unit (DAU) which assists investigators with all aspects of the discipline process, including the need to consult the OPP. While the final report states that the results were negative for alcohol, drugs of dependence and steroids, the urine test result is reported as Negative Cancelled test, suggesting that the testing did not proceed. Victoria Police has internal time frames for completing complaint investigations, which vary depending on the file classification. service of a show cause notice as to why the officer should remain employed by Victoria Police, drug testing (without any formal interview or statement). It is anticipated that the new procedure of notifying work files will allow IBAC to independently consider those allegations in a timely manner. In the fourth matter, officers involved in the primary allegation of assault were interviewed criminally, which resulted in findings of not substantiated; however, their senior officers were subsequently subject to disciplinary interviews about their roles supervising the incident in question. Formal interim action recorded in ROCSID included: Interim action was not taken by Victoria Police in relation to identified risks in one matter involving allegations of sexual harassment because the subject officer was already suspended with pay for a separate complaint. An allegation of criminal association involving a police officer was determined to be unfounded, as the investigation was unable to confirm that the officers associate had a criminal history or identify intelligence to suggest involvement in criminal activity. Administration consists of the Command Staff, an Administrative Assistant and the Professional Standards Unit. Salt River Police Department Twitter28, 2022, that it will consider Victoria Police's handling of serious complaints against officers While PSC reclassified the file on closure (837 days after the complaint was initiated), the matter was never notified to IBAC. While not formally documented using form 1426, various emails and other notes on the file suggest that the file was allocated to an officer in the PCU who was considered to be sufficiently removed from Investigations Division. Victoria Police is a contemporary and agile workplace and supports flexible working arrangements. The review will consider the design of the Victorian police oversight system, including: the external oversight of police's use of significant powers by independent integrity agencies. discrediting Victoria Police. A Discipline Charge Notice was ultimately served but not heard following the subject officers dismissal in relation to the wilful exposure matter. 24 PSC has advised that following IBACs Operation Ross, Victoria Police is reviewing probity issues including the provision of complaint histories to inform complaint investigations. IBAC also noted that this was concerning, given that the investigation appeared to suggest that a discipline charge was warranted. However, in one complaint involving an inspector, the investigating sergeants inspector attended the discipline interview as the corroborator because of the subject officers rank. Are outcome letters to subject officers attached to the file? Two of those matters were subsequently reclassified as criminality not connected to duty or corruption complaints (C3-3 and C3-4). In the absence of clear directions and effective process, a complaint management system such as Interpose is of limited use to managers and reviewers to actively monitor the progress and audit complaint files. As the central area responsible for overseeing, coordinating and investigating complaints within Victoria Police, PSC plays a critical role in identifying broader issues arising out of complaints that could be addressed through policy or other initiatives at the organisational level. In a further two files the investigator did not contact any of the relevant complainants. Thirteen files involved subsequent extensions that were not approved by the department head (namely the Assistant Commissioner PSC). One minor misconduct complaint (C2-1) did not contain any notes to indicate why the subject officer was not advised of the outcome. Misconduct within Professional Standards Command . A detective made a complaint to PSC after a police officer was named by two suspects in an espionage investigation. twenty-seven files that identified at least one subject officer but failed to attach the subject officers complaint histories, fifty-six files that did not attach a conflict of interest form or contain any other documents to indicate that conflicts of interest were otherwise considered, forty-seven files that did not contain a formal investigation plan, including two matters that involved the preparation of criminal or disciplinary briefs, nine of 11 files where advice was sought from the DAU but that advice was not attached, twelve files that identified a contactable complainant but did not attach a copy of the outcome letter sent to the complainant as required by section 172 of the Victoria Police Act. Australia Covid-19: More than 40 Victoria Police staff could be fired It is therefore important that investigations are conducted in a timely manner. 5 Victoria Police Act 2013, s 169(2) and (3). Victoria Police officers suspended after CBD pursuit the minimum level of professionalism required by both members, the impact of their personal lives upon other members working at the station, consequences of any identified breaches of discipline or legislation (ie workplace bullying), welfare and counselling services available, negotiation by consent for a short-term transfer to neighbouring stations to mitigate any ongoing workplace tension, relevant PDA entries for both parties outlining the minimum professional standards required from sworn members both on and off duty without reference to their personal circumstance linked to a performance discussion. Comment on human rights issues that were or should have been addressed. Describe the charges laid (or recommended by the investigator, DAU or OPP if not pursued), Outcome of disciplinary and/or criminal proceedings (or details of how decision was reached if charges were not pursued). One of the risks in allowing files to be reclassified as work files on closure is that they can be closed prematurely. Reviews from Salt River Police Department employees about Salt River Police Department culture, salaries, benefits, work-life balance, management, . However, IBACs audit of complaints investigated by PSC also identified eight files that raised concerns about the way Victoria Police views complaints and its treatment of officers who make complaints about their colleagues. Notes on those files indicated that in both matters, some complainants declined or refused to provide further information. Professional Standards Command. IBAC auditors were not able to locate formal written advice on four of the 11 files that contained some indication that advice had been sought from the Discipline Advisory Unit (DAU). While it is not always possible to identify the relevant police officers, investigators should take reasonable steps to pursue available lines of inquiry. Victorian Man In Induced Coma After Police Officer Appears To Stomp On In that matter, a complaint involving an allegation of off-duty assault was allocated to an investigator who had three allegations of assault recorded in his complaint history (although none were substantiated). to support and promote the continuing education . member involved refers to an officer who is the subject of a complaint or a performance issue. Figure 7 summarises the recommended action in the 59 audited files. If no: Reason for disagreeing with the characterisation of the allegations, Does the audit officer agree with the complaint classification, If no: Reason for disagreeing with the complaint classification, Does the audit officer agree with the complaint reclassification? IBAC acknowledges that Victoria Police is undertaking a comprehensive review of the current drug testing regime and has identified the need to review high risk areas within designated workplaces.60. Our focus is on preventing corrupt behaviours involving police employees. As shown in Figure 2, of these 22 files, a member of the public was the primary complainant in 14 matters. While the first request for 30 days was appropriately approved by an inspector, the subsequent requests for 30, 181, 92 and 92 days were not approved by the Assistant Commissioner. Those reasons included: Auditors identified nine complaints where the investigator did not contact relevant civilian witnesses and did not provide reasons. one work file that was reclassified as a corruption complaint (C3-4) on closure, but warranted classification as a complaint of criminality not connected to duty (C3-3), for allegations of drug possession and misuse of ammunition, two corruption complaints (C3-4) and one minor misconduct complaint (C2-1) that were reclassified as work files on closure on the basis they contained intel only. An entry was made in the subject officers PDA and he was directed to undertake additional equity and diversity training, and submit a 500-word essay on standards of behaviour. As such, all PSC investigation reports should include commentary on the investigators consideration of the officers complaint histories. mentioned human rights in some way but failed to identify human rights issues relevant to the file (14 files), failed to address human rights issues at all, including human rights issues relevant to the file (three files). Figure 6 summarises the determinations reached in the 59 files audited. 25 References to complaint history reports for subject officers relate to ROCSID report EHR01S, Full Employee History Report Complaints and Compliments. The 2016 audit also noted that it should be reinforced with investigators that a complaint should be assessed on the balance of probabilities. After reviewing CCTV footage of the incident, taking statements from the attending police and conducting a discipline interview with the subject officer, the PSC investigator recommended discipline charges. Given the pivotal role of DAU advice in determining the action that will be taken in relation to a subject officer, details of the request and advice provided should be clearly documented and attached to each file. However, issues were identified in three cases, potentially undermining the value of those tests as suggested in case studies 13, 14 and 15. The sample was not drawn randomly and is not therefore representative of all file types investigated by PSC. Accordingly, the investigator recommended that the Victoria Police Drug and Alcohol Testing Unit take steps to have RSD declared a designated workplace and designated work function for the purpose of drug and alcohol testing. one file recommended that the complainant be notified in writing but did not attach a copy of correspondence to confirm that this occurred. This audit reiterates the importance of timely and appropriate drug testing. Auditors disagreed with the initial classification of 16 complaints (27 per cent of the sample). In the course of preparing criminal charges against a subject officer for obscene exposure, PSC identified a separate sexual harassment issue, created a separate work file and undertook preliminary enquiries to identify relevant victims and complainants. While it is possible that investigation plans were prepared but saved elsewhere by the investigator, plans should be saved in Interpose or placed on the file and reviewed regularly. The Police Conduct Unit was set up for people wishing to make a complaint or compliment on service given by a particular Police Member Contact Details . This included: Of the 59 files audited, 33 (56 per cent) involved complainants who could not be contacted either because the complaint was lodged anonymously or because the complaint was generated internally by a Victoria Police officer in the course of their work. This included: In 15 complaints, auditors found that key evidence relevant to the allegation was not considered, including LEAP records, CCTV footage, email or internet audits, and targeted drug tests. In addition, 15 allegations on work files resulted in a determination of for intelligence purposes, which is not a valid determination under the VPM. A Victoria police spokesperson declined to comment on the OPP's decision, or whether it would impact on the work of Sofvu. However, none of those files formally recorded action on any identified deficiency in Victoria Police premises, equipment, policies, practices or procedures as advised in the VPMG complaint management and investigations. As with criminal investigations, failure to act on a complaint in a timely manner can result in loss of evidence, limit the options available to remedy the complaint, and add to the ordeal of both the complainant and the police officer who was complained about. The audit also considered whether any criminal or disciplinary briefs were attached to the file (regardless of whether charges were pursued). committing an offence which carries a jail term. The review aligns with broader Victoria Police priorities of victim safety, offence and offender management, child safety and ensuring a safe, capable workforce. The audit only identified one instance where Victoria Police failed to advise IBAC of a notifiable complaint. Reasons for decisions are easier to explain when all the details are maintained on file. In an email to his manager, the investigator advised that his recommendation was based on verbal advice from the DAU that no further action was required because it would not be abnormal for a serving member to try to persuade the intercepting member to not take action (ie PBT/speed). This included: IBAC auditors also identified two matters where the subject officer was advised that an allegation was either not proceeded with or not substantiated, while ROCSID records those allegations as substantiated.