TV Review:
To Catch A Copper
This week’s #TuesdayTip is a TV Review for To Catch A Copper – a truly jaw-dropping fly-on-the-wall series about the work of Avon and Somerset Police’s Counter Corruption Unit. Filmed over four years, it is currently available to stream on All4, with new episodes airing each Monday.
When Jed Mercurio first started writing the award-winning BBC drama, Line Of Duty, he famously received very little assistance from the police (at least officially), and so his AC-12 unit is largely fictional. It was a brilliant series, but bore only limited resemblance to what really takes place in this incredibly sensitive area of policing.
So full credit to Avon and Somerset Constabulary for allowing TV crews behind the scenes to show what really goes on. And credit also to the Chief Constable of A&S Police, Sarah Crew, for taking part and being willing to speak, on camera, extensively about her own feelings on the subject.
At the time of writing, three episodes have aired. Officers that are subject to allegations of misconduct typically appear on screen, their interviews recorded without their names or identity concealed. Sometimes victims also appear, with some brave enough to also do so openly. There is extensive use of body worn camera evidence.
The preponderance of allegations so far have been of sexual misconduct, with officers accused of inappropriate sexual relations with members of the public, revenge porn, an attempt to use police resources to blackmail a man using sex-workers, rape and even grooming, sexual assault and unwanted sexual advances towards police cadets or new recruits to the service.
Other allegations have involved violent confrontations with the public, a failure of duty of care towards prisoners, and alleged racially-insensitive policing or unwarranted and poorly carried out stop and searches. The thoughts and feelings of victims and their loved-ones are also given airtime.
The show follows the team as they investigate these potential offences and we see the ultimate outcome of the proceedings.
This is not a comfortable programme to watch, not least because of the questions and debates it raises. Sometimes you find yourself outright disgusted at these officers’ actions. Other times, you may find yourself siding with the officers who appear to have done their job as well as they could under difficult circumstances. It certainly provoked debate in our house.
You also see the role of the Police Federation Representatives. I learned that they are not defence lawyers, nor necessarily advocates for the accused officer. Rather they are there to ensure that correct procedures are followed.
The outcomes are also a subject of debate and can leave you feeling angered at decisions made, whether by the IOPC (Independent Office of Police Conduct) not to recommend more serious disciplinary action or by the Crown Prosecution Service not to proceed with criminal charges. There is plenty of fodder here for the armchair lawyer. The cynic may also question the use of ‘reflective practise’, whereby an officer found lacking discusses what went wrong and how they could improve. At times, you feel that the officers involved are simply saying what they need to say to tick all the boxes and return to duty. And then there is the time taken; officers accused of very serious offences can spend over a year suspended on full pay, before resigning the day before their tribunal.
In the programme’s voiceover the narrator questions whether it is right that a system where the police investigate themselves is up to the task. Sometimes, you have to wonder …What are your thoughts on this series? Too kind to the police? Too harsh? Were you shocked?
As always, feel free to comment here or on social media.
Until next time, all the best,
Paul.
If you are a writer with a tip to share, or fancy writing a fictional interview between you and one of your characters, please feel free to email me.
When Jed Mercurio first started writing the award-winning BBC drama, Line Of Duty, he famously received very little assistance from the police (at least officially), and so his AC-12 unit is largely fictional. It was a brilliant series, but bore only limited resemblance to what really takes place in this incredibly sensitive area of policing.
So full credit to Avon and Somerset Constabulary for allowing TV crews behind the scenes to show what really goes on. And credit also to the Chief Constable of A&S Police, Sarah Crew, for taking part and being willing to speak, on camera, extensively about her own feelings on the subject.
At the time of writing, three episodes have aired. Officers that are subject to allegations of misconduct typically appear on screen, their interviews recorded without their names or identity concealed. Sometimes victims also appear, with some brave enough to also do so openly. There is extensive use of body worn camera evidence.
The preponderance of allegations so far have been of sexual misconduct, with officers accused of inappropriate sexual relations with members of the public, revenge porn, an attempt to use police resources to blackmail a man using sex-workers, rape and even grooming, sexual assault and unwanted sexual advances towards police cadets or new recruits to the service.
Other allegations have involved violent confrontations with the public, a failure of duty of care towards prisoners, and alleged racially-insensitive policing or unwarranted and poorly carried out stop and searches. The thoughts and feelings of victims and their loved-ones are also given airtime.
The show follows the team as they investigate these potential offences and we see the ultimate outcome of the proceedings.
This is not a comfortable programme to watch, not least because of the questions and debates it raises. Sometimes you find yourself outright disgusted at these officers’ actions. Other times, you may find yourself siding with the officers who appear to have done their job as well as they could under difficult circumstances. It certainly provoked debate in our house.
You also see the role of the Police Federation Representatives. I learned that they are not defence lawyers, nor necessarily advocates for the accused officer. Rather they are there to ensure that correct procedures are followed.
The outcomes are also a subject of debate and can leave you feeling angered at decisions made, whether by the IOPC (Independent Office of Police Conduct) not to recommend more serious disciplinary action or by the Crown Prosecution Service not to proceed with criminal charges. There is plenty of fodder here for the armchair lawyer. The cynic may also question the use of ‘reflective practise’, whereby an officer found lacking discusses what went wrong and how they could improve. At times, you feel that the officers involved are simply saying what they need to say to tick all the boxes and return to duty. And then there is the time taken; officers accused of very serious offences can spend over a year suspended on full pay, before resigning the day before their tribunal.
In the programme’s voiceover the narrator questions whether it is right that a system where the police investigate themselves is up to the task. Sometimes, you have to wonder …What are your thoughts on this series? Too kind to the police? Too harsh? Were you shocked?
As always, feel free to comment here or on social media.
Until next time, all the best,
Paul.
If you are a writer with a tip to share, or fancy writing a fictional interview between you and one of your characters, please feel free to email me.
