Where crime exists, many areas of the criminal justice system are involved in resolving the findings. A key point of concern is police accountability, the essay defines whether the justice system can be held responsible and accountable for deviations from its goals and values ​​in resolving such matters, a question of accountability. When investigating highly controversial issues and events, it is important to question accounts of the truth, whether there is a definitive final version of the truth or, when faced with conflicting accounts, who to believe. When policing systems are inadequate to the circumstance, it is critical to be able to distinguish between organizational and individual responsibility and the ways in which it can be counteracted. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay The most current system for police complaints is the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) established in 2018 by the Policing and Crime Act, which had replaced the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC), established in 2004 by the Police Reform Act 2002. The IPCC arose from broad calls for change in the system, including the Macpherson inquiry into the murder of black teenager Stephen Lawrence and the general questioning of the police service itself. Before the introduction of the IPCC, the first police complaints system was the Police Complaints Authority (PCA), but the system struggled to achieve any kind of credibility. To counter this, the IPCC and IOPC place a strong emphasis on their independence due to the fact that they are not part of any government department and are completely independent of the police service. Features of the IPCC and IOPC include that they can independently investigate, manage or supervise investigations into all police contact deaths and other serious allegations, and the investigators involved have all the powers of an officer of police. The task of these organizations is to improve the police's handling of complaints, increase trust in the system and, ultimately, determine where responsibility lies within the system. As for police departments themselves and their ability to cause casualties, by law and policy it is an individual police officer's responsibility to decide whether or not to shoot and under criminal law "A person may use force what is reasonable in crime prevention." In the case of Jean Charles de Menezes (JCDM) and his fatal shooting on 22 July 2005 this was not the circumstance. In response to 4 previous suicide bombings and 4 other failed attack attempts, the police developed tactics for special circumstances including a system called Operation Kratos, this operation allows the police to fire without warning with the intent of incapacitating the target. Under this operation, instead of a single officer's decision, the decision to shoot is based on the command of the designated senior officer, in this case Cressida Dick. The police identify one of the attackers as Hussain Osman and decide to trace his address and question residents. The surveillance team arrives before the firearms team and there are not enough officers to question everyone, JCDM leaves the occupation without being identified as a possible suspect. Surveillance officers locate JCDM and identify him as matching Osman's description and follow him onto a bus, JCDM leaves the bus to go to the metro station which is closed then proceeds toreturning to the bus however his movement is interpreted as an act of anti-surveillance and the officers are convinced that he is the suspect. Once at the tube station, Cressida Dick declares "stop him" to the surveillance officers who ask what to do, as the superior officer designated with the order to shoot this comment is extremely ambiguous in the circumstance. JCDM gets on the subway and is surrounded by officers, armed squads arrive in the subway station and approach JCDM, he gets up to exit the subway unaware of the situation but is forcefully pushed back and subsequently hit 11 times in the head with 8 shots. hit. After the attack, public witnesses are held for interview and a member of the public gives an account in which he interpreted 3 officers armed with firearms running around the station as instead 2 officers armed with firearms chasing a target and this broadcast was subsequently taken as done by Scotland Yard. The head of Scotland Yard gives an interview, repeating the television report as fact, thus releasing completely inaccurate information to the public and the press. The case was not conducted in an orderly manner but was the result of panic and pandemonium. As a result, the head of the Home Office asks the IPCC not to investigate the case, however the IPCC tries to react for control, and this delay in referring the case to the investigation case creates a suspicion. The IPCC was not effective in this case, established only recently in 2004, the system had only been in place for a year and was new and inexperienced and faced with conflicting reports from officials, officials who were slow to collaborate with their notes and inaccurate information presented to them by the Metropolitan Police Station, there were many features that made it a challenging investigation which ultimately led to the IPCC reaching no conclusions about responsibility. In cases where the police are armed and make potentially fatal mistakes, public trust in these authorities can be seriously undermined. undermined. Structures that help ensure accountability involve procedures such as reviews, which is what Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC) intends to do. In the public interest, HMIC provides independent assessments of the effectiveness and efficiency of policing, interpreting evidence to make recommendations for improvement based on questions it believes the public wants answered. They assess the police effectiveness, efficiency and legitimacy (PEEL) of all 43 police forces in Wales and Wales by collecting evidence from annual inspections of all forces, for example emerging themes from the 2018-2019 report have praised the use of digital technology to achieve quicker responses and greater knowledge and awareness about protecting people with mental health, but also found that some forces had inexperienced and underqualified officers investigating large numbers of crimes without adequate adequate supervision, which was a cause for concern. In addition to this, in 1951 the establishment of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR), followed by the Human Rights Act, generally provided a very strong legal framework for the authorities which would make them responsible for their actions in this matter. occasion in which the authorities violated rights. The IPCC also takes human rights law into account when investigating complaints of police misconduct. The HMIC and the ECHR provide brief guidance for the conduct of the authorities. HMIC provides advice to the Home Secretary, police authorities and forces.