Very disconcerting stance taken by the IPCC in relation to my appeal of the polices finding about tampering with the footage. There is 40 minutes footage , which the police claim is non recorded. They did record 12 minutes , one segment of 5 minutes , an one of 7 , separated by 25 minutes. There is no issue with the break as all parties accept that in this period it was calm , however there is an additional 40 minutes that wasn't recorded despite the police claiming that my behavior was so bad it necessitated my arrest. Myself and others have a different version. There was 4 officers and the least experienced ,a SC was tasked with been camera man. While I accept malfunction can happen and batteries do run out , it strikes me as exceedingly odd that the officer claims he only realized that it didn't record once he was back in the station 3 hours later. For his version to true , he failed to spot the battery was dying (he could of charged it during the 25 minute break or asked his fellow officers to take over) and/or failed to realize that the device wasn't recording. He offers no explanation for the non recording , other than guessing when asked 10 months later
The IPCC view that it is impossible for an officer to tamper in any way with what is recorded is complete nonsense , in fact it dangerous. Before I go on , by tampering I mean anything from involves willfully not disclosing the footage. What I have realized is that at the time , recording is like a smart phone , in that when you stop and start , each time an additional file is created. So in my case I accept 2 files were created that cover the 2 segments but in my view the police have provided NO PROOF whatsoever to address the question. ""How do I know the copy provided and presented as a bit for bit copy of the recorded footage is what they say it is" .
The scary thing is that I asked the IPCC for a very crude piece of evidence , a window explorer screen print of the MASTER COPY which would clearly show when it was created , which it is claimed was on the night of the incident. YET what I got back was a embedded image of when the files were created , which is completely not what was asked. This reply could of put this to bed but the fact they decided NOT to provide the date the MASTER was created and the files created is a big red flag
I would very interested in hearing peoples experience of missing footage