Seòmar agus comataidhean

Yes. Does the bill help with that?

So it is possible for families to be told of the outcome of a gross misconduct or misconduct complaint.

Could it be longer than 12 months?

Does the PIRC have to take into account the point that, if it takes longer than 12 months, the officer would need to get a form of representation? They might not be covered by the Scottish Police Federation if they have left, for example.

My next question is another way of looking at an area that Sharon Dowey has pursued. I have looked at cases where there are allegations of assault. That is a criminal matter and it can take quite a time to get to court. We know that those periods are getting shorter, but Police Scotland often proceeds against officers when there have been no criminal proceedings on the same facts.

That seems to be a waste of police resources if the court has decided that no guilt attaches to the officers. I could understand there being civil proceedings for gross misconduct or misconduct if there were other matters. Is it your view that Police Scotland should not necessarily automatically hold disciplinary proceedings where a not guilty verdict has been given on the same facts?

Yes, but it is still the same facts.

That is what others have said, but I do not really understand it. I could understand if there were also matters other than the assault. In other words, in my view, Police Scotland should not conduct a mini civil trial about an assault being committed if there are no other matters. It should not be automatic, because it could be construed as Police Scotland not being happy that it lost the case. It just seems odd that, in all cases, it would still proceed against police officers who have been tried in a criminal court in a case that could have taken two or three years to come to court.

Good morning. There is quite a lot to get our heads around because of the mechanics of the different organisations. I am glad that it is not just me.

I have been trying to pursue some lines of questioning around what difference the public would see and to make things a bit real for myself with regard to the difference that the proposals would make on the ground. Today, we received a helpful briefing from Victim Support Scotland that sets out different categories of complaints and gives a couple of examples. I will mention one of the examples because, when I read it, I thought that I remembered the case, which concerns a complaint that Victim Support Scotland supported against a police officer who had shared WhatsApp messages, including details of injuries. The incident was investigated by the anti-corruption unit on the basis of criminal charges, and 13 officers were referred to the national conduct unit. There were no criminal proceedings in that case, but the officer concerned resigned. It struck me that Police Scotland could investigate that on the grounds of gross misconduct using the 12-month rule, so I ask myself why it was not pursued on the grounds of gross misconduct in the first place. Would that be right?

Thank you. I want to come to another point, which involves public complaints about, for example, belongings not being returned and misconduct allegations of some kind being made. That can be an issue in high-profile criminal cases involving victims and their families. I do not think that there are any time limits when the public complain and it goes to the PIRC. Am I right in saying that? The reason that I think that there are no time limits is because Victim Support Scotland quoted a person who had been affected by crime as saying:

“PIRC should have stronger powers to insist within the statutes of law that Police Scotland return responses within the time limit.”

Actually, that says “the time limit”, so there might be time limits.

We have been discussing time limits with regard to the conduct of police officers, but I am thinking about what happens when the public complain. I would have thought that that was quite an important thing to address, given that one of the purposes of the bill is to give the public more confidence when they make complaints.

I believe that those who complain are not entitled to information about the outcome of a misconduct investigation.