A quote on Supt Manns profile page taken from the South Yorkshire Police website states My role as Head of PSD is to enhance the standards of our workforce and help to boost the confidence of the public. It is the responsibility of all employees as representatives of South Yorkshire Police, to display the highest of standards of behaviour at all times
Nice mission statement. So you’d expect him to lead by example.
More recently in an article in the Sheffield Star he was quoted as saying that upholding standards and the integrity of the force is a ‘priority’ and We continue to make sure police officers and staff are acting appropriately and standards are being withheld (yes the article said withheld, fairly sure they meant upheld, or did they ?)
I’ve already covered his initial failure to comply with legislation and record the complaint relating to my Subject Access Request here along with his interference in saying that the redactions were correct. The investigation and subsequent ICO referral proved otherwise.
I contacted Supt Mann regarding two complaints as they were not progressing, in fact one of them took just over a month to get recorded. The complaint was then assigned to the Chief Inspector who was still named on a previous complaint under appeal with the IPCC – a conflict of interest / impartiality if ever there was one
Supt Mann in conjunction with his Director of Investigations then assigned both of these complaints to a DS in the investigation team. Time passed and as I wasn’t getting the 28 day updates I should have been I contacted Supt Mann. After a brief exchange of emails and my pointing out the section of legislation / statutory guidance he conceded with
you are correct that you should receive a written update every 28 days and I am sorry if this hasn't happened. As Ds McGuinnes is not at work to discuss this, I will take it up with him when he returns. You will then receive written updates as per the regulations
In the following weeks, both the Interim Assistant Chief Executive of SYPCC, Sally Parkin, and Hannah Bunker of the IPCC also discussed the lack of updates with Supt Mann.
After more missed 28 day updates and promises this wouldn’t happen again, I contacted Supt Mann again and received the following response.
I have to report that due to some confusion back in June, DS McGuinness was initially deputed to deal with one of the complaints but he wasn't aware until he returned from leave in August that he was also investigating the other complaint. Records show he was officially allocated this on 7th August. This error obviously led to some confusion between you and DS McGuinness for which he was not to blame. As Head of the Department I take responsibility for this error and apologise for the confusion and concern it has caused you.
So Supt Mann didn’t pass the complaint on for almost 8 weeks and didn’t bother to tell me, it’s only when I started asking awkward questions he admitted the error
In the same email he again concedes that his department have failed to comply with legislation despite his previous reassurances that they would.
I concede that your updates did not meet with 9.64 of the IPCC's Statutory Guidance, although the terminology used is "may include". Also I accept that he missed a 28 day update as per 9.62 and so again I am sorry. Updates to complainants will form part of the advice/instruction we give to all our investigators and your experience, anonomised or course, will be fed in to this learning. It does in fact form part of the Agenda at our Investigating Officers meeting on 30 October