POL00126594
POL00126594
Dave Posnett - Behaviour Evidence/Examples 2012-2013
Care, Commit & Challenge
I had instigated a meeting with Cartwright King Solicitors, as they had been contracted
to deal with prosecutions concerning Post Office Ltd cases. I also invited the Head of
Criminal Law as he had been appointed following the split from Royal Mail Group.
However, on discussing the proposed content of the meeting, he did not think that
most of it was relevant and stated that Cartwright King was our customer and we
simply had to tell them what we wanted and how it should be delivered. Whilst I
acknowledged this view, the meeting had a wider objective in that it involved
relationship building with a new service provider and was intended to cement a good
working relationship moving forward. We didn’t agree, so I transferred my challenge
to the Senior Security Manager, who not only agreed with my views, he ensured that
the Head of Criminal Law didn’t attend the meeting.
As the entire South Operations Team had left for one reason or another, I participated
in the recruitment process to appoint new Security Managers. The first wave of
successful applicants (4 individuals) had been appointed and I then led and played a
key role in their induction. This included drafting a 5 week induction timetable, to
ensure they had a full and proper grounding in the business of Post Office Ltd and the
Security Team. The timetabled activities included meetings with representatives from
all Security strands, a counter course, a CViT course, model office tour, visit to
Grapevine and the RoMEC Innovation Lab, Crown Office visit, and Cash Centre visit.
This involved liaising with various people within Security and the wider business, to
gain their input and support. Following the induction I sought feedback from the new
recruits and this resulted in an overwhelmingly positive experience being
communicated.
Due to the split from Royal Mail Group I arranged a meeting with Cartwright King
Solicitors, who had been contracted to advise on and prosecute Post Office Ltd cases,
The meeting was held on a Saturday to ensure the best turnout of solicitors and
barristers, Topics covered included a presentation on the current Security Team, roles
and remits, proceeds of crime, investigation types and reporting, along with generic
information such as Post Office branch types, contracts, and Network Transformation.
This meeting was extremely well received by Cartwright King and demonstrated
collaborative working and meeting the needs of customers. Cartwright King now have
a better understanding of many areas of Post Office Ltd and specifically their remit
and relationship with the Security Operations Strand of the Security Team.
To support resource issues concerning the South Team, I have been proactive and
assisted wherever necessary. One example has included enquiries being made at a
London Crown Office in a case where forged bank notes had been accepted. My
involvement meant the Security Manager leading (who lived near Sheffield) did not
have to attend London to make enquiries. Another example concerned me attending
a 4 day trial at Southend Crown Court, due to the relevant Security Manager having
left the business. I familiarised myself with the case, held all evidence and unused
material for use by the Barrister during the trial, and played the role of the interviewer
for the jury, which ensured all relevant material was available and the case
progressed in a smooth manner.
I have volunteered, along with a small group of other members of the Security Team,
to become an accredited Security Manager for the duration of the Olympic Games.
This has necessitated completion of a health & safety course, exam and extended
vetting process in order to represent the business in this capacity. Given there are 2
Post Offices within the Olympic village, I was a point of contact for any security related
issues and had access rights to entering the village should any security related issues
have arisen.
POL00126594
POL00126594
Following receipt of an ‘abuse of process’ claim against a Security Manager in relation
to a prosecution case, I was asked by the Senior Security Manager to make the
necessary enquiries into the case and report back my findings. I requested and
received all details of the case from the Security Manager and then held a fact finding
interview with him. The allegations included the lack of caution at interview,
discussions held between tapes, vulnerability of the suspect, oppressive interviewing
techniques and the failure to retain evidence. In challenged the Security Manager on
all these points and checked his understanding of PACE in relation to these matters. I
completed a comprehensive report of my findings to the Senior Security Manager after
the conclusion of my enquiries.
Following the appointment of 4 more Security Managers, I commenced phase 2 of the
induction process. This was similar to phase 1, with timetabled activities being drafted
over a 5 week period and ensuring all those that would deliver respective parts of the
induction were willing and able to do so. A couple of improvements were made
following feedback from phase 1, but again the feedback from phase 2 was very
positive.
I agreed to assist in the development of a Security Manager who was subject of an
Improving Under Performance plan. My area of focus concerned offender report
writing and I provided the Security Manager with 3 reports from different colleagues
which I considered were good examples and 1 report of his that I had critiqued and
amended. Prior to a live meeting/conference call, the Security Manager read all the
reports and we discussed the merits of the good examples and the areas that could be
improved in his own reports. He agreed with my rationale in that his reports were
disjointed, contained too much information on occasions and too little information on
other occasions, and there were grammatical errors. This provided him with areas to
focus on and seek improvements in his reports.
As some of the recently recruited Security Managers were not trained to conduct
criminal investigations (ie no PACE training), I planned and prepared a 2 week
residential training course. This covered interviewing techniques, searches,
notebooks, witness statements and other appropriate tools and legislation relevant to
their role. Previous similar coursework materials were used and updated. I also
carried out the training and utilised the National Policing & Improvement Agency
(NPIA) training facilities in Ryton.
10
Due to retract issues concerning ATMs, I volunteered to participate in scripted
telephone calls with branches, ensuring they maintain and feed back incidents of
retracts and advising them that the retract facility was being switched off. This
demonstrated both care and commitment in enabling branches and indeed the
business to address an area of fraud.
11
Following separation from RMG and the relevant SPOCs that were the Fls point of call
for SARs information, I have drafted a new process. This included a new intelligence
request form which was agreed with SOCA and enables Accredited Financial
Investigators to gain access to SARs data. Results are emailed by SOCA to our pnn
secure email addresses and a separate email is sent to our business email addresses
confirming this. The process benefits all parties and is a useful tool in gaining
intelligence on suspects.
12
Following receipt of sensitive information concerning a possible fraud by a member of
staff, who is connected with a member of the Security Team, I proceeded to make
discreet enquiries and raise a case. The case was allocated to a new Security
Manager and I have assisted him at every stage of the case, from evidence gathering,
assessment and planning of apprehension/interview, to ensure the sensitivity remains
confidential and that all appropriate Stakeholders are informed of developments.
POL00126594
POL00126594
13
Due to the agreement that a colleague would conduct all compliance checks on case
file submissions, I met with him and handed over all appropriate documentation and
explained the process and recording/monitoring mechanisms associated with the
compliance process. I also checked the first few compliances undertaken, to ensure
consistency and understanding and thus enable a smooth transition of the process to
this colleague.
14
To support new Investigators (and those who have not given evidence or managed a
trial) I have sourced and booked a courtroom confidence training day with an external
supplier. I have also booked a courtroom at Inner London Crown Court for the day in
order to deliver this training and make the day more authentic. I will also be attending
the training to assist on the day (22/01/13).
15
Prior to the split with RMG, all Investigators received Conflict Management training
and a refresher every two years. As this is a key area of health and safety for those
dealing with offenders I am currently looking into delivery of a training package to all
Sec Ops Investigators.
16
I have continued to support inexperienced colleagues by being a point of contact for
advice and assistance, some recent examples include preparation of a case and first
interview under caution, assistance in first witness statement gathering, guiding on
risk assessment activities in an immediate enquiry, checking completed files for
compliance adherence.
17
I have challenged Grapevine when an immediate PNC check was required due to
Investigators being on route to a large audit shortage. Prior to the split with RMG, a
facility existed where telephone checks could be conducted and forms submitted later,
but on this occasion I was told a form had to be sent in. I raised this through my line
manager and it was subsequently agreed that a telephone check was acceptable.
Since then guidelines on PNC checks have been communicated to the wider team.
18
I have played an instrumental part in getting new POL notebooks designed and
printed for future use. 4 new notebooks were required by the London Team, but
Grapevine sent 11 (some spares?). I then outlined the correct process to Grapevine,
including form POL041, which provides the required audit trail against signature of
notebooks issued and returned.
19
I challenged the decision of an Area Manager who did not suspend a Branch Manager
subject to a theft investigation and interview under caution where admissions were
made. Through discussions my line manager had with the Crown Efficiency Manager
and HR, the Branch Manager was subsequently suspended whilst the retail line
considered any appropriate disciplinary action. This challenge was based around
demonstrating consistency and integrity by the business on the back of warranted
efforts by the Security Team.