Thank you to our headline sponsor, Gallagher Group Insurance.

The two-day event brought together legal specialists, policing experts, Federation representatives and the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) to examine how Post-Incident Procedures (PIP) can secure reliable evidence while ensuring officers are treated fairly.

Led by PFEW PIP Lead Leigh Godfrey, discussions explored officers’ recollections, recorded footage, expectations for initial and detailed accounts, and the importance of promptly confirming investigative status.

An account from two Warwickshire officers who attempted to rescue a driver from a burning vehicle demonstrated why these issues matter, including for officers who are witnesses rather than subjects of an investigation.

Body-worn video: the camera records, the human remembers

Opening the seminar, Leanne Moorhouse examined the benefits and challenges of body-worn video (BWV).

A former officer with more than 20 years’ experience, Leanne previously served as the National Police Chiefs’ Council’s BWV Subject Matter Expert, helping shape national strategy across England and Wales.

She highlighted BWV’s contribution to criminal investigations, evidence of assaults on officers, complaints handling and officer safety, alongside its role in supporting public trust through transparency.

However, widespread use brings financial, operational and reputational responsibilities, including storage, retention, access, redaction, disclosure and deletion. Inconsistent practice presents further challenges.

A central theme was the difference between what a camera captures and what a person experiences. Stress, perception, memory and trauma can influence recollection. Where footage and an account differ, the recording may reveal the difference without explaining it.

Leanne emphasised that an initial account should capture an officer’s own recollection, rather than describe footage viewed afterwards. The IOPC’s published approach similarly emphasises obtaining an initial account before a key police witness views their BWV.

“We need to make sure we protect that officer in two years’ time,” she told delegates.

Live footage can also enable tactical advisers and commanders to influence an incident, raising questions about identifying relevant witnesses and managing their evidence.

Securing the best evidence

Hugh Davies OBE KC, of Three Raymond Buildings, examined the legal and evidential challenges following deaths or serious injuries involving police contact.

He addressed officers’ responsibility to cooperate openly and professionally as witnesses, while explaining why investigative status matters. A witness may become a subject if further evidence indicates possible misconduct or criminality, bringing different legal and procedural protections.

The IOPC’s February 2026 witness guidance confirms that status is kept under review. The duty to cooperate does not apply in the same manner to subjects, whose right to remain silent must be upheld.

Hugh distinguished between assessing honesty and assessing the accuracy of memory. Officers involved in lengthy pursuits or life-threatening encounters may not immediately recall every action or decision. Accounts should accurately describe what they perceived at the time.

He examined legal support at Stage 3, when personal initial accounts are provided, and Stage 4, when detailed accounts are obtained.

Recognising the limits of early recollection and allowing appropriate recovery are essential. College of Policing guidance says detailed accounts are usually provided after at least 48 hours, although this may be earlier for key police witnesses who have not been adversely affected.

 

A panel featuring Leigh Godfrey, Leanne Moorhouse, Hugh Davies, the IOPC’s Steve Noonan and College of Policing armed policing specialist Kevin Nicholson discussed BWV, memory and support for officers providing accounts.

Warwickshire Police Federation Chair Simon Payne challenged the panel on delayed updates and uncertainty about investigative status. Steve acknowledged the concern and said the IOPC was aiming to improve its processes.

Delegates stressed that officers need timely information about both their status as witnesses or subjects and the stage reached within PIP. Uncertainty can compound the stress of a traumatic incident.

Is PIP voluntary?

Opening day two, JNP Legal solicitor Tony Williams examined whether participation can meaningfully be described as voluntary.

With 29 years’ criminal law experience, Tony distinguished physical compulsion from the professional, legal and reputational consequences of not engaging. He considered witnesses’ duty to cooperate and the IOPC’s separate power to compel serving police witnesses to attend an interview.

Tony raised concerns about limited information at Stage 2 and increasing demands for detail at Stage 3, warning that initial accounts can become detailed evidential statements before officers have recovered.

“There needs to be a greater understanding and acceptance of what can reasonably be expected from a Stage 3 account,” he said.

“Stage 3 should focus on the essential facts only, and that principle needs to be understood and accepted by investigators, oversight bodies and the courts.”

Injuries, fatigue, lack of sleep, emotional shock and trauma can affect fitness to provide an account. Tony called for early confirmation of Key Police Witness status, appropriate facilities, timely information and effective legal and Federation support.

Why PIP matters – A case study

Simon Payne and Warwickshire PCs Mateusz Dabrowski and Dominic Strange brought the process into sharp focus.

In July 2023, they stopped a suspicious vehicle. The driver fled, leading to a pursuit before crashing and becoming trapped in a burning vehicle.

Both officers repeatedly entered the vehicle to attempt a rescue before carrying out CPR. Tragically, the driver later died.

They were designated Key Police Witnesses rather than subjects. BWV provided crucial evidence of their efforts to save his life, but the immediate aftermath brought anxiety and uncertainty.

Mateusz said: “It was the first time I’d been involved in a death following police contact, and it was quite traumatic. I thought I was going to lose my job.”

Dominic highlighted the need for early preparation: “At the time, I still didn’t know what a PIP was. I’d only been in the job for 15 weeks.”

Their experiences demonstrated why early reassurance, clear information and informed representation are essential, even when officers have done nothing wrong.

Preparing officers before they need PIP

The case study prompted support for embedding PIP awareness in student officer training and extending understanding across ranks and operational roles.

Across both days, speakers stressed that reliable evidence depends on officers’ physical condition, understanding of the process, access to advice and the effects of the incident.

Leigh Godfrey said, “No officer should walk away from a traumatic incident thinking, ‘I’m going to lose my job.’ The Police Federation wants to see Post-Incident Procedure training embedded in student officer training, so officers understand the process before they ever have to face it.