Where Do We Go From Here? A Cursory Update From the IOPC and Some Thoughts
A couple of weeks ago, I woke up one morning and just felt impossibly hopeless about Nikki's case. Chris Ness's baseless attacks toward me and others was possibly the straw that broke the camel's back, but in reality his words are mostly noise to me. He has found a couple of interesting things, don't get me wrong, but I can't abide by someone who behaves like an antisocial narcissist towards hard-working, well-meaning people who have been dedicated to this case for nearly eight months.
The biggest problem with this is what a sorry distraction it is. This is not about individuals, their information, how "right" they are, or how "close to the truth" they are. When you promise your readers that "all will be revealed" for seven months, all you're doing is taking the focus off the victim, Nicola, and spinning an endless yarn that keeps you in the spotlight and, in my opinion, is unhinged from planet Earth. That's problematic enough, but when you then attack other creators for—What? Supporting one another's ideas, however uncertain and theoretical they may be?—your true colors become painfully obvious.
In any case, I took a break to recharge. My dedication to Nikki had taken the place of some of my other work, and my finances were in shambles. But I couldn't stay away for long. Too much has been done. And there are other brilliant creators, like Irish Eyes and Vicki Marie and the intrepid minds of Twitter, who have worked so hard, continue to work so hard, and need our support. It may not seem like it right now, but all the work we've done, every single comment and video and Facebook post and tweet, matters. If we decide that they don't matter, then the powers that be have won. And I call this "work" too, because it is. It is worthy of support in the form of views, comments and yes, money. I'm proud to call this advocacy my side hustle, and I will work for Nikki for as long as it takes to get some real answers.
The College of Policing investigation is supposed to wrap up soon (some say it will be released in November). In the meantime, the IOPC released a shady little update on Nicola's case on August 2. None of us were apparently alerted to it, mostly because they didn't use Nicola's name in the post at all, and because they posted it on a lesser-read section of their website called "Learning." Oh, that old euphemism again!
I found out about it because I had been corresponding with the IOPC about whether they were going to update the findings of their investigation after the inquest, as they'd promised to do back in April. They emailed me on September 11, of all days, to let me know there was an update. This is the text of the update in full:
Concerns for woman’s welfare and police contact prior to her death – Lancashire Police, January 2023
On 10 January 2023, a Lancashire Constabulary police officer attended the home address of a woman, in response to a welfare concern that had been reported to North West Ambulance Service (NWAS). The officer was part of a multi-agency team, which included a paramedic and two mental health practitioners.
On 27 January 2023, the woman was reported missing and subsequently found dead on 19 February 2023 during the missing-person investigation.
We started an independent investigation, focusing on the contact the force had with the woman on 10 January 2023, following a referral from Lancashire Constabulary.
Our investigation focused on the actions and decisions of the police officer who attended the woman’s address on 10 January 2023 and whether these were in accordance with policy, guidance and training. We interviewed the officer who engaged fully with our investigation and provided a full account of their decisions and actions.
Our investigation concluded in April 2023.
We waited for all external proceedings to be finalised before publishing our findings.
We concluded there was no indication any police officer had behaved in a manner that would justify the bringing of disciplinary proceedings or had committed a criminal offence. However, we identified two areas of individual learning for the officer, which relate to recording information on police systems and activation of body worn video. We shared our findings with Lancashire Constabulary, who agreed with our findings.
In our opinion, the most appropriate outcome to action the identified learning is through the reflective practice process.
An officer reflecting on their actions is a formal process reflected in legislation. The reflective practice review process consists of a fact-finding stage and a discussion stage, followed by the production of a reflective review development report.
The discussion must include, in particular:
• a discussion of the practice requiring improvement and related circumstances that have been identified, and
• the identification of key lessons to be learnt by the participating officer, line management or police force concerned, to address the matter and prevent a reoccurrence of the matter.
An inquest into the woman’s death was held in late June 2023.
The Coroner concluded her death as accidental; a result of falling into cold water and drowning.
We carefully considered whether there were any organisational learning opportunities arising from the investigation. We make learning recommendations to improve policing and public confidence in the police complaints system and prevent a recurrence of similar incidents.
In this case we identified organisational learning for Lancashire Constabulary in respect of updating its guidance documents for multi-agency vehicles, to ensure all police officers working in this role understand what is expected of them, as well as the provision of guidance for officers more widely when dealing with similar situations.
Lancashire Constabulary confirmed they have reviewed and updated the guidance, following our findings.
We therefore did not deem it necessary to use our legislative powers to issue recommendations under the Police Reform Act 2002 as we were satisfied with their response.
Lancashire Constabulary committed to sharing such learning through their organisation learning board for implementation.
Sigh, the "Reflective practice process." You have to wonder why the IOPC felt the need to state that Nicola allegedly "drowned" "by accident" in this update. How is the cause and manner of death relevant here? Call me a cynic, but is it because that conclusion negates the need for the IOPC to do anything further about this case except send an officer who forgot to document things properly OR turn on their body-worn camera off to do some reflecting? The mind reels.
This so-called "update" didn't exactly give me the hope I've been missing for the past month. But it did spur me on. It did make me even more certain, as if I hadn't been certain already, that this entire case has been swept under the rug by the authorities and the regulatory bodies that are supposed to hold them accountable. From the too-perfect absence of eyewitnesses on the morning of January 27, to the glaring impartiality of Andrew Snowden, to the absurd explanation of Nicola's Fitbit data, to the jaw-droppingly inappropriate and useless Channel 5 special, to the farcical defences of a psychic with a major role in the case, there is nothing about this tragedy that makes sense, that adds up, or that can be tied up with a pretty bow and called an accident.
If we let it be called such, things like this are just going to keep happening. Bodies of water will continue to be used to conceal crimes, as they have from time immemorial. Abusers will be taking notes and feeling confident about what they can get away with. Career criminals will be heartened by the fact that as long as they operate in the domain of a lazy and misogynistic police force, they can get away with just about anything.
So no, I will not fade into the background and become a hopeless spectator. I will continue to research, write, send emails that go unanswered, and support the hearts of gold still covering this case.