WIREDGOV

Our investigation in connection with an acid attack on Daniel Rotariu has led to Leicestershire Police accepting recommendations we made around improving risk assessments and the management of call logs.

We considered the police response to information the force received about Katie Leong and Mark Cummings, who were later accused of carrying out the attack on Mr Rotariu. He lost his sight and was badly burned when he had sulphuric acid poured on him on 27 July 2016 as he slept at a house in Leicester.

In March last year (2017) Ms Leong was found guilty of the attempted murder of Mr Rotariu and jailed for life with a minimum term of 17 years. The jury cleared Mr Cummings of the same charge.

We investigated the action taken by officers and staff after they received reports dating back to February 2016 that Ms Leong was acquiring acid to carry out a premeditated attack on an unnamed third party, and that Mr Cummings was in contact with her in breach of a restraining order.

Evidence gathered by our investigator indicated that Ms Leong was not contacted by police about either allegation. It also suggested that two calls logs had been closed down inappropriately without further action being recommended, and that there had been a potential failure to conduct proper risk assessments.

IOPC Regional Director Derrick Campbell said: “My sympathies are with Mr Rotariu who suffered life changing injuries in this appalling incident. He has been put through a terrible ordeal.

“Our investigation indicated that potentially more could have been done with the information police received. It highlighted a number of issues in relation to the handling of calls and assessment of risks. I am pleased that Leicestershire Police has taken this organisational learning on board. The force has agreed to look at clarifying the guidance given to control room staff over what actions are expected of them and the recording of decisions and rationale on incident logs.”

The force agreed there was a case to answer for misconduct for a police sergeant but the case was not proven at a meeting held on Tuesday (15 May). Similarly it was agreed that a former Team Leader had a case to answer for misconduct over her management of one of the calls logs, although formal action could not be taken against her as she is no longer serving in a staff role.

Although not amounting to misconduct, the performance of a further member of staff and a police constable was found to be unsatisfactory in relation to their handling of intelligence about breaches of the restraining order. This was dealt with through management action.