Categories
Police

Sussex Police – Crime Investigation Requires Improvement

The Police Effectiveness, Efficiency, and Legitimacy (PEEL) assessment for Sussex Police, conducted by His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services (HMICFRS) for 2023-2025, evaluated the force’s performance across various policing functions.

The report highlights both strengths and areas for improvement, grading Sussex Police on key areas such as preventing crime, protecting vulnerable people, leadership, and resource management. Below is a summary of the key findings and recommendations.

Sussex Police PEEL Assessment – 2023–2025 24th July 2025

HMICFRS has graded Sussex Police’s performance across nine areas. They found the force was ‘good’ in one area, ‘adequate’ in seven areas and ‘required improvement’ in one area.

Read the Sussex Police Report Online or Download below.

The chief of Sussex Police (Jo Shiner KPM) said she is ‘proud of the positive changes’ that have been highlighted in the latest inspection report – but the force has been told it still needs to improve the quality of its crime investigations.

Sussex Police is mostly ‘adequate’ but force told it needs to improve the quality of its crime investigations – Sussex World

Key Findings

  1. Preventing and Deterring Crime
    • Sussex Police demonstrates a reasonable performance in preventing crime but requires improvement in its approach to tackling anti-social behavior (ASB). The force has effective processes for identifying crime trends and allocating resources but struggles with consistent community engagement to prevent ASB.
    • The report notes that the force’s neighborhood policing teams are stretched, impacting their ability to proactively address local issues.
  2. Protecting Vulnerable People
    • The force performs adequately in safeguarding vulnerable individuals, including victims of domestic abuse and children at risk. However, response times to incidents involving vulnerability are inconsistent, and there are delays in risk assessments for some cases.
    • Sussex Police has improved its response to missing persons but needs better training for staff to identify hidden vulnerabilities effectively.
  3. Investigating Crime
    • Sussex Police shows mixed performance in crime investigation. While serious crimes like homicide and sexual offenses are generally well-handled, lower-level crimes, such as theft, often lack thorough investigation due to resource constraints.
    • The force has made progress in reducing backlogs of digital forensic examinations, but further investment is needed to maintain this improvement.
    • Overall Sussex Police Investigating Crime Requires improvement
  4. Responding to the Public
    • The force’s call-handling performance is a concern, with longer-than-average wait times for non-emergency calls. Emergency (999) response times are within acceptable standards, but the force struggles to meet demand during peak periods.
    • Sussex Police has introduced initiatives to improve call management, but these are yet to yield consistent results.
  5. Leadership and Workforce
    • Leadership within Sussex Police is rated as good, with clear efforts to promote a positive culture and support staff well-being. The force has robust processes for professional development and diversity training.
    • However, workforce morale is affected by high workloads, particularly in response policing teams, and there is a need for better succession planning to address staffing gaps.
  6. Efficiency and Resource Management
    • Sussex Police is graded as requiring improvement in efficiency. While the force has made strides in financial planning, it faces challenges in optimising resources due to increasing demand and limited budgets.
    • The report praises the force’s collaboration with other agencies, such as local councils, but notes that partnerships could be better leveraged to address complex issues like ASB and youth crime.
  7. Public Trust and Legitimacy
    • The force performs well in maintaining public trust, with strong community outreach programs and transparent complaint-handling processes. However, stop-and-search practices require improvement to ensure fairness and proportionality, particularly for minority groups.
    • Sussex Police has made efforts to address disproportionality in policing but needs to enhance data analysis to monitor outcomes effectively.

Areas for Improvement

HMICFRS identified several areas where Sussex Police must improve:

  • Anti-Social Behavior: Develop a more proactive strategy to tackle ASB, including better engagement with communities and partnerships.
  • Call Handling: Invest in technology and training to reduce non-emergency call wait times and improve demand management.
  • Investigation Quality: Ensure consistent standards for investigating lower-level crimes and reduce delays in digital forensics.
  • Stop-and-Search: Enhance oversight and training to ensure stop-and-search is conducted fairly and proportionately.
  • Workforce Support: Address workload pressures and improve succession planning to maintain operational resilience.

Positive Highlights

  • Sussex Police excels in leadership development and fostering a positive workplace culture.
  • The force’s collaboration with other agencies, such as in tackling serious organised crime, is a strength.
  • Improvements in handling missing persons cases and reducing digital forensic backlogs show progress in critical areas.

Other Sussex Police Articles

Chief Constable Jo Shiner Sussex Police
Sussex Police
National Stalking Awareness Week – Sussex Police
Sussex Police, the King and High Sheriff

Conclusion

The 2023-2025 PEEL assessment paints a mixed picture of Sussex Police’s performance. While the force demonstrates strengths in leadership, community trust, and tackling serious crime, it faces challenges in resource allocation, call handling, and addressing anti-social behaviour.

HMICFRS recommends that Sussex Police prioritise improvements in these areas to enhance overall effectiveness and public service.

Check out our articles on Sussex Police, Policing by Consent, Police Impartiality, Are the Police for Hire ?, Police Public Confidence and Engagement, Police Professional Standards Department, IOPC, Crime Reporting, What is a Police and Crime Commissioner ?, Policing, Police News, Two Tiered Policing, Thought Police, Police Digital Service, Knowledge Hub – Police Digital Service, Wasting Police Time, Police Community Support Officers (PCSO), Met Police, Chief Constable Jo Shiner, R v Sussex Justices and the highly questionable Sussex Family Justice Board.


The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.


Latest Articles


Most Popular


You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

[post_title] was last updated on the 23rd June 2026

By Dom Watts

Dom Watts founded the Ministry of Injustice in July 2021. Dom is an IT Professional with 30+ years experience in Tier 1 Banking, Government, Defence, Healthcare and Global Blue Chips. Dom has no legal training and is not a lawyer but has previously consulted for a Magic Circle Law Firm. You can find Dom on X or Google.

Dom Watts publishes the Ministry of Injustice as a citizen journalist. The journalism exemption is detailed in the Data protection and journalism code of practice published by the ICO and Section 124 of the Data Protection Act 2018.

Section 2 of the Defamation Act 2013 sets out the defence of truth. Section 3 of the Defamation Act 2013 sets out the defence of honest opinion. Section 4 of the Defamation Act 2013 sets out the defence of public interest. Section 8 of the Defamation Act 2013 sets out the single publication rule.

Section 4a of The Limitation Act 1980 defines the time limit for actions for defamation or malicious falsehood as one year from the date on which the cause of action accrued.

Article 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998 gives the right to freedom of expression. "This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers."

"Free speech encompasses the right to offend, and indeed to abuse another." - Para 43 Scottow v CPS [2020] EWHC 3421 (Admin)

"Free speech is a fundamental common law right" - Para 21 R v Shayler [2002] UKHL 11 [2003] 1 AC 247 per Lord Bingham and Para 42 Phillips -v- Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs [2024] EWHC 32 (Admin)

Dom is a member of The Free Speech Union

“A key issue here is the need to distinguish between conduct which, however objectionable, does not justify invoking the criminal law and conduct which crosses the line and results in criminal liability" - Para 31 R v O’Neill [2016] EWCA Crim 92 [2016]

“Harassment is generally understood to involve improper oppressive and unreasonable conduct that is targeted at an individual and calculated to produce alarm and distress” - Para 38 R v O’Neill [2016] EWCA Crim 92 [2016]

"The behaviour said to amount to harassment must reach a level of seriousness passing beyond irritations, annoyances....The gravity of the misconduct must be of an order which would sustain criminal liability" - Paras [40-44] Hayden v Dickenson [2020] EWHC 3291 (QB)

"If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything"

In 2002 Dom Watts was an unlikely consumer champion. The dad of three from Croydon took on the power and might of Kodak – and won...Dom on BBC Working Lunch

Rule of Law - Open Justice - Policing By Consent