Written for the February 25, 2022, issue of Penguin News. Printed under the headline “Police have stopped me 50 times, says local man”.

Found not guilty in a trial on February 23 (court report below) concerning a charge of driving without a seatbelt, Stanley resident Glynn Morrison told Penguin News he feels he has been harassed by some members of the Royal Falkland Islands Police (RFIP). Mr Morrison says he has been stopped “upwards of 50 times” since getting his licence in 2018. Despite these many stops the seatbelt charge is the first time Mr Morrison was charged with anything.

Mr Morrison told Penguin News he has been stopped “over random stuff” and that when pulled over he has been “told to go home, [asked] where I’m going, what I’m doing, what I’m up to” and has been asked for his insurance papers and change of ownership papers while driving in Stanley with his three previous vehicles, including his first vehicle after getting his licence.

“I’ve been asked for the same insurance papers for that same car a number of times now.”

He added that at one stage a police officer told him they were “going to find something to do [him] for.”

On when the police attention started, Mr Morrison said, “the first day I got my own car was the first time I was stopped and it has just continued from there over the years.”

Speaking about other forms the harassment has taken, Mr Morrison said that he was pulled over to be breathalysed by the police on his birthday. Mr Morrison said the police officer claimed he was swerving as he drove, and this was their reason for believing he was drink driving. Mr Morrison says that this was an assumption due to the fact it was his birthday, which one of the officers showed awareness of by laughing and saying happy birthday to him as he got into the police car to do the breathalyser test.

“After they breathalysed me and realised it was zero they were pretty quick to let me be on my way,” he added.

Mr Morrison also showed Penguin News videos, taken by his passenger, of a police vehicle following him for more than 15 minutes as he drove around Stanley; the video showing part of what was estimated to be more than half an hour of being followed.

He described that the police followed him from The Jetty Centre car-park to Prince Philip Street, including through residential streets. Disconcerted by being followed, Mr Morrison stopped at the dead end at the end of Diamond Jubilee Road and waited for 10 minutes before being followed again by the police vehicle, which had waited on Prince Philip Street.

“Frustrated” by being followed, Mr Morrison turned into the last loop of Sapper Hill and turned in the road before going back the way he came, but found that the police vehicle had waited for him as he left the street. The same happened again after Mr Morrison turned off onto the Bennett’s Paddock Road and waited there for the police to pass; on pulling out of the street he found them waiting for him again. They then followed him the entire way to the Victory Bar across Ross Road before parting ways there. Key points during this were confirmed in videos shown to Penguin News.

Mr Morrison noted that this was not the only occasion he was so clearly followed, but that this was the most extreme example.

When this particular occasion was raised in the Summary Court on February 23 the officer who was allegedly in the vehicle said it was “simply not true” and that it “never happened.”

Mr Morrison said this harassment has been from “different [police officers] over time.

“There are some police officers I have a very good relationship with, I talk to them and they’re absolutely fine, and I’m quite happy to talk to them. It’s just a select few.”

Theorising on a reason for the action, Mr Morrison said he felt police from larger cities may be “bored” in Stanley.

He added that as he doesn’t drink or smoke he enjoys filling time driving, as he likes cars, and as such he becomes a target.

“Lots of people my age, it’s just a target for [the police] to pick on.

“Pretty much everyone my age I know has been stopped ... I don’t know how many times.”

Mr Morrison told both Penguin News, and the court at his trial, that he made reports to the police on two occasions which were “brushed off” as there was no evidence, or he had “nothing to stand on.”

Mr Morrison also showed concern about the motivation of the officers involved regarding the charge which saw him go to court.

He described that when police stopped him outside of his work-site they first asked whether he had permission to drive the vehicle, whether he had insurance to drive the vehicle, and who was the owner of the vehicle - which was an FIG marked Blue Rover. Mr Morrison explained that due to his FIG employment he was permitted to drive the vehicle and was included on the insurance. It was at this time, however, that one of the officers said they saw him driving earlier on without a seatbelt.

Following Mr Morrison’s being pulled over for allegedly driving without a seatbelt he had to return to the police station on three separate occasions to prove his permission to drive the government vehicle, each time with paperwork from higher levels of government, until he had to take the list of the whole government fleet of vehicles and proof he could drive these FIG vehicles as an employee, to the police station.

Even the summons of Mr Morrison to court caused him undue stress, as he was pulled over by a police officer when he was a passenger in his girlfriend’s vehicle - the officer having flashed their police lights at them.

The officer came to the passenger side window, gave Mr Morrison the summons, and then left. In court it was said contact with Mr Morrison was attempted at home and on his mobile phone, but he says he never received any calls.

The claim of Mr Morrison driving without a seatbelt was contested, and Mr Morrison was found not guilty in the Summary Court on February 23 (details below). Prior to the court case Mr Morrison said “I think they’re just going out on a wing, hoping they’ll get me for something.”

When speaking in court about the effect of these regular stops by the police Mr Morrison said it “makes me really nervous and really anxious.”

After the not guilty verdict Mr Morrison told Penguin News he was “very happy with the outcome” and that he was “hopeful more recognition and effort will come from the police by getting back more to the roots of community policing instead of a them and us attitude which some officers seem to have.”

Mr Andrew Dawson, Head of Legal Services present as prosecution representation on January 13, raised that police were willing to provide body worn camera footage but that this had gone missing due to a “problem with the system” at the police station.

This issue was said to be under investigation by Synergy, the FIG IT Solutions Provider, but whether the footage had been recovered was not said during the course of the trial.

As of going to print Penguin News have not received a response from the Royal Falkland Islands Police to questions sent regarding the allegations of harassment or the loss of the body worn camera footage.

Any responses received from the Royal Falkland Islands Police will be included as follow up in the March 4 edition of Penguin News.

Court Report

A verdict of not guilty was delivered by Justices of the Peace following the trial of Mr Glyn Morrison, 21, on a charge of driving without a seatbelt on November 2.

The prosecution case focused upon the witness statements of the two police officers, PCs McKeown and Browning, who said that they saw Mr Morrison driving without a seat belt as they passed each other on the intersection of Eliza Cove Road and Davis Street. The officers claimed they could see the seatbelt buckle over the shoulder of Mr Morrison as they drove past, and that they could see no strap across his chest, from the estimated distances of 3 to 5 meters as they drove past each other.

The defence focused upon the distance between the two vehicles and the nature of seatbelt buckles in the model of Land Rover used by Falkland Islands Government - which they said drop to a low resting position out of sight for a passing vehicle.

The defence presented images and videos to support these claims, and the witness police officers were unable to say - based on the images - whether a seatbelt was worn. They said that this was due to glare on the windows of the vehicle, present in the pictures but not on the day, as well as pixelation of the images.

A witness for the defence, the passenger from the time of the charge, said that Mr Morrison always drove with a seatbelt previously, and as such he believed Mr Morrison had worn one on November 2.

Concerns were raised by the defence that this charge had come forwards as part of a campaign of harassment by the police, though this was not referenced by the Justices in their delivery verdict, and was referred to as a “distraction” by the prosecution in closing statements.

Police Response

Penguin News have received responses to questions asked of the Royal Falkland Islands Police (RFIP) prior to release of the article regarding alleged harassment by police of a local man.

Inspector Gavin Clifton said regarding the statement of Mr Morrison that he has been stopped by police more than 50 times, “RFIP does not routinely comment on individual cases, but this level of involvement between an individual and the police would be highly unlikely.”

On the alleged following of Mr Morrison around Stanley Inspector Clifton said, “vehicles that repeatedly drive around high footfall areas and priority patrol areas are likely to frequently be seen by police, which is not an issue provided their driving is safe and considerate to other road users.”

He added, “The last Falkland Islands Community Police Public Perception Survey highlighted the public’s concern about road policing and road safety; and RFIP regularly receives calls from the public about inconsiderate driving and other traffic offences.”

Asked about the occasion on which an officer “blue lighted” Mr Morrison to serve him a court summons Inspector Clifton explained legislation states best practice is to serve summons by hand, and after “numerous efforts had been made, over several days” it was seen as “reasonable to stop the vehicle” when seeing Mr Morrison. Inspector Clifton said use of blue lights to stop a vehicle is common practice, to alert the stopped driver and others for safety.

Regarding an officer allegedly telling Mr Morrison they would “find something to do [him] for” the Inspector said “This is not reflective of our practices or policing of our community, and we would find these comments unacceptable,” and added “RFIP will not tolerate officers targeting the community, our approach should always be intelligence-led, legitimate and proportionate, with each officer being accountable for their decisions.”

On the statement of Mr Morrison in court that he had made complaints but been told this was “not worth the time” or he had “nothing to stand on” Inspector Clifton stated there was a “clear police complaints policy which has been widely advertised.” He added: “Should Mr Morrison wish to register a complaint this will be investigated as would any other matter, however there is no complaint from this gentleman registered in our system.”

The Inspector was also asked about the lost body worn camera footage from the cautioning of Mr Morrison. He told Penguin News an independent IT Specialist “interrogated the system in order to try and retrieve and view the data, but was unfortunately unsuccessful.”

He noted in “most systems there can be challenges in uploading and retrieving data due to technical issues. This is true of the system that RFIP use but also in the UK. Systems will encounter problems and this is something experienced by police forces everywhere.”

The interrogation of the system showed “there was an unspecified system error which led to the corruption of the data.”

Asked whether any other data had been lost, Inspector Clifton said “not that I am aware of; I have received no reports to suggest this is the case.”

He stated it had been identified the RFIP had need to upgrade body worn cameras and camera support system, and funding was being sought for new cameras with “improved visual and audio outputs, which should result in better protection for members of the public as well as police officers.”

Asked about the culture towards arrest numbers Inspector Clifton said: “There is not a numbers-driven performance culture within RFIP for arrests or any similar metrics. RFIP has worked particularly hard in this area,” having meetings across government to “look at community resolutions which support victim-focused delivery. It is vital that we consider a range of alternative outcomes to court proceedings, and that these outcomes put the victim at the centre of what we do. There is genuine and significant interest in developing these, with discussions underway and work being progressed to deliver on this ambition”

Editorial

We’ve run a few stories about policing issues in the last few months, and each time I’ve got a huge range of responses - even walking around the shops and speaking to readers, because it’s a contentious issue which is close to many hearts, whether because you’re strongly pro-police, anti-police, have been in the force, have a loved one in the force, or have had memorable good or bad experiences with police officers here or elsewhere.

Among concerns raised of whether we’re biased against the police (we’re not) and if we’ve made efforts to get the full story (we do), one thing I always hear is that we’re risking “making children afraid of the police.”

It simply isn’t the job of Penguin News to be the PR people for the police. If children are made to feel fear because of the actions of the police, then the police shouldn’t engage in those actions.

There are dozens of theories on how policing should be done, and I’m not going to explore all of them, because each theory could be explored with a doctorate.

But some notable concepts include: Preventive policing, which focuses on heavy law enforcement, the punishment of law breakers to create a hostile environment for crime - deterring it before it happens. Problem-oriented policing is what it says on the tin, identify what problems are present in a community due to crimes and disorders, and police them to end those problems. Community policing is having a good relationship with your community to work alongside them to prevent and respond to crimes and disorders to better the community - which in turn further prevents crime, in theory, by increasing sense of pride in your community.

I know the police regularly reference community policing in their committee meetings, and I notice police around and chatting to members of the community more regularly in recent months; but I don’t know where activity like our front page story fits into the RFIP’s subscribed policing theory. Pulling over members of the community 50 times doesn’t count as community engagement, and certainly isn’t going to help develop a spirit of a community police force.

All in all, I feel there is little to be achieved by actively seeking out crimes to punish. If you tell officers that their goal is to get as many arrests as possible, then they’re going to find something to arrest people for. This is very much not community policing.

I’ll finish off by saying I’m no police abolitionist, but I will point out that many who ascribe to the belief say that it’s due to officers choosing to defend each other’s actions over the protection of the community. Let’s not let that be the case in the Falklands.