Police Community Support Officers.

[Herr Tubthumper]

Fair enough, but you're just going to have to trust me on this one. Personally I just ask someone the basic question "what happened" first up, let them talk while I make notes, then go through it all again, asking questions so i get all the information theyve inevitably missed. Then I stitch it all together so I get a complete account but in the correct format. Its always in that person's words, and I do stress that, because it's their statement not mine and they'd have to stand up in court with it, but if I just let them write what they wanted straight up, it would take twice as long and I'd only end up re-writing it all anyway. If you don't agree with what's been written then you shouldn't sign it, frankly, because it's a legal document once it's complete.

You make a very good point, you only have to view this site for a very short while to realise that, given free license, most people miss many points and blabber on with mostly irrelevant information. Myself included.

 

[Lady Whistledown]

Good question. It's a highly responsible position with immense power....so I loosely thought that only well rounded, educated and smart people need apply. A raft of academic qualifications plays a part in this but obviously there are a lot of other qualities and skills also needed.

A quick straw poll, based on the people in my current and previous teams, would suggest that there are as many if not more coppers who have degrees than not, so it's not necessarily the case that just because you don't HAVE to have many qualifications, only the unqualified apply.

That said, in my opinion, personal skills are far more important to the job, and I'd far rather work with someone who has 4 GCSEs but is a great people person and clear thinking under pressure, than someone who has a PhD in Law & Criminology but can't talk to the public for love or money.

 

[Lady Whistledown]

You make a very good point, you only have to view this site for a very short while to realise that, given free license, most people miss many points and blabber on with mostly irrelevant information. Myself included.

People also tend to write what they know happened, not what they actually witnessed, which are two very different things. It's not a criticism, it's human nature for the brain to assimilate all the information it has and come to a conclusion about it. My job is to split out exactly what you saw from what you think you know.

As an example, two men might come running out of the Post Office wearing balaclavas, carrying guns and carrying swag bags. Most people would sit down and automatically write that they'd just witnessed an armed robbery, whereas actually all you actually SAW was two persons running out of the post office in balaclavas carrying something that looks like a gun and holding bags. You don't know what went on inside the post office before or during, but your brain is already filling in the gaps and telling you you've seen a robbery.

If that makes sense?

 

[Tricky Dicky]

People also tend to write what they know happened, not what they actually witnessed, which are two very different things. It's not a criticism, it's human nature for the brain to assimilate all the information it has and come to a conclusion about it. My job is to split out exactly what you saw from what you think you know.

As an example, two men might come running out of the Post Office wearing balaclavas, carrying guns and carrying swag bags. Most people would sit down and automatically write that they'd just witnessed an armed robbery, whereas actually all you actually SAW was two persons running out of the post office in balaclavas carrying something that looks like a gun and holding bags. You don't know what went on inside the post office before or during, but your brain is already filling in the gaps and telling you you've seen a robbery.

If that makes sense?

Perfect sense and I could quote numerous psychological experiments that demonstrate strange ways the human mind works and creating false memories - which must cause real problems for your lot when you get to trial.

 

[BensGrandad]

This hapens with motor accidents how many people actually see car A hit car B nine out of ten people hear a bang and then look around and as EK says assume what has happened as they have seen the outcome. If you asked the question did you see car A hit car B the answer would be No but etc

 

[Lady Whistledown]

Perfect sense and I could quote numerous psychological experiments that demonstrate strange ways the human mind works and creating false memories - which must cause real problems for your lot when you get to trial.

Well by that point it's the CPS's responsbility not mine, but I'd hate to think a victim lost out on justice because I hadn't bothered to write a decent statement.

Here's the thing...in the scenario described above, most people would write something like "I was shopping in the High Street when I saw an armed robbery happening with two men with guns and they drove off in a red car towards Hove". If I asked what they looked like they'd probably say "about six foot tall? One was wearing a blue jacket" or something like that.

Whereas when I turn up I'd be asking you what you were doing there, how long you'd been there for, whether you'd seen or heard anything unusual before that moment, what first drew your attention to it, what time it was and how you knew that, how far away you were from the Post Office, where exactly you were in relation to it, inside or outside, what the light conditions were, natural or artificial, dark or light, whether there was anything obstructing your view partially or for part of the time, whether you'd seen the men before or had any other reason to remember them, how long exactly you had them in your sight for, their gender, age, ethnicity, height, build, whether they were clean shaven or not, distinguishing marks, tattoos, piercings, scars, hair length, style, colour, clothing including headgear, coat, shirt, trousers, shoes, colour and style, anything memorable about the way they walked or ran, any voices or accents heard, the make, model, colour, condition, registration and any other notable things about the car, like stickers, stripes, tinted windows, exhausts, unusual plates, dents, scratches, paint jobs; other vehicles nearby, other suspicious persons, what they were carrying (style, colour, type of bag), right or left handed if you could tell, what sort of gun it was, what previous knowledge the witness has of guns, whether they heard anything as well as saw anything...etc etc. I could go on...

In short, that is why the police write statements for members of the public, rather than letting them do it straight off. Essentially, the more detail there is, the more convincing it is as evidence, because it shows you really took in what you saw. If it's vague and unclear, a defence solicitor would tear it apart and tell the court you didn't really see what happened. I let people tell their story, of course, and I certainly don't put words in people's mouths, but it's amazing what detail people can remember if I prompt them with questions about the sort of things I've listed above.

 

[Lady Whistledown]

This hapens with motor accidents how many people actually see car A hit car B nine out of ten people hear a bang and then look around and as EK says assume what has happened as they have seen the outcome. If you asked the question did you see car A hit car B the answer would be No but etc

I've seen experiments where a hundred people are placed in one place and some sort of incident is staged in front of them, or shown a video.

Afterwards, they have to write an account of what happened. You get a hundred completely different accounts, many of which wouldn't even appear to relate to the same incident. Such are the intricacies of the human brain!

 

[BensGrandad]

One aspect that always impresses me about the police is their ability to get a photokit of a suspect from talking to people. I have tried this with my family when talkingabout this try to describe your nearest and dearest whom you know every detail about so that their description would stand oiut and they could be identified out of 100 other people in the shopping centre, unless of course they had a multi coloured feature like hair or a coat but just a normal blonde or brunette in an outdoor coat.

 

[Lady Whistledown]

One aspect that always impresses me about the police is their ability to get a photokit of a suspect from talking to people. I have tried this with my family when talkingabout this try to describe your nearest and dearest whom you know every detail about so that their description would stand oiut and they could be identified out of 100 other people in the shopping centre, unless of course they had a multi coloured feature like hair or a coat but just a normal blonde or brunette in an outdoor coat.

Again, that's because people don't think about all the little nuances of a person's appearances, right down to the most basic stuff. There are millions of variations but because we see so many faces on minute by minute basis we don't think too deeply about what they are.

Things that are so obvious you don't even register them in your mind. Someone might say "he was my height, wearing jeans and a coat" without mentioning the most obvious feature- whether they were white, black, Asian, mixed race or whatever. Most white people, if observing a white suspect, won't even think to mention the suspect's ethnicity, as there is an assumption by the brain that I'd already know that. If it's a non-white suspect, they're more likely to mention it, as it's a clear difference that sticks out in your mind. Hair is another tough one. "Short" hair...well how do you define short? Cropped? Shaven? Collar length? And does short hair have the same meaning for men and women?

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

One aspect that always impresses me about the police is their ability to get a photokit of a suspect from talking to people. I have tried this with my family when talkingabout this try to describe your nearest and dearest whom you know every detail about so that their description would stand oiut and they could be identified out of 100 other people in the shopping centre, unless of course they had a multi coloured feature like hair or a coat but just a normal blonde or brunette in an outdoor coat.

Black, six foot.

 

[Westdene Wonder]

When the support Officers were first appointed I believe the Police Federation objected as it was `Policing on the Cheap`however it was stated they would only accompany and assist a real policeman.In fact they are more often seen as support pairs and quite often two women together which of course in the rougher areas of the town is a joke,particularly as the pairings can consist of a younger member who looks as if she has just left school with a middle aged matronly figure, the local lads follow them around making insulting comments with the invitation `go on arrest me`.
It would have been far better if these Plastic Constables as the lads term them had been employed as office staff freeing up the real PC`s for the beat.

 

[RexCathedra]

Of course we would like to have more Bobbies on the beat, in an ideal world, but they are expensive and the policing budget can only go so far.

Oldest song in politics -- everyone wants to go to heaven, but nobody wants to die. I imagine the 'PCSO's are useless' and 'my taxes & rates are outrageous' circles when graphed wouldn't make so much a Venn diagram as a bull's-eye.

 

[Biscuit]

There are some shit holes in North London and the Police are stretched beyond belief. I find it quite assuring to see uniformed 'support' walking the streets. I see lots of them everywhere and they seem like a brave bunch talking to gangs and getting involved in all sorts of situations. I have quite a lot of respect for them and think they do a sound job. Obviously would rather they there proper coppers but we can't afford it and they do a good job helping/sorting people out until a PC can get to the scene.

Looks like I'm on my own though! Maybe they're pretty redundant on the happy streets of sunny Brighton, but there are a few places up here (Tottenham/Wood Green/Edmonton etc) where I feel safer just seeing them.