DOCSLIB.ORG

(PCO0010) Written Evidence Submitted by Dr Graham Smith

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
(PCO0010) Written Evidence Submitted by Dr Graham Smith (PCO0010) Written evidence submitted by Dr Graham Smith, Senior Lecturer in Law, University of Manchester (COR0010) Introduction 1. I am a Senior Lecturer in Regulation at the University of Manchester and serve as a consultant on human rights, specialising in police misconduct and complaints, to the Council of Europe. I have close to 40 years of experience in the field as complainant, civil rights activist, consultant and researcher. Since completing my doctoral thesis Police Crime: A Constitutional Perspective in 1998 I have published widely in academic journals. In 2009 I drafted the Opinion of the Commissioner for Human Rights Concerning Independent and Effective Determination of Complaints Against the Police and in 2011-12 led research commissioned by Greater Manchester, West Midlands and British Transport Police on Disproportionality in police professional standards. In September 2020 Palgrave Macmillan published On the Wrong Side of The Law: Complaints Against Metropolitan Police, 1829-1964, the first of a two volume study of complaints against officers serving with the Metropolitan Police. Complaints reform 2. Police complaints were first codified in England and Wales under Section 49 of the Police Act 1964. Since then there has been a gradual transfer of responsibility for handling complaints from police forces to non-police bodies. The Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) is the fourth statutory police complaints oversight body. 3. For close to forty years the Home Affairs Committee (HAC) have played a prominent role in reviewing and recommending reform of the police complaints system and reports of four inquiries dedicated to examining procedures and the operation of oversight bodies have been published to date: The working of the first oversight body, the Police Complaints Board, was examined in the 1981-82 Fourth Report, ‘Police complaints procedures’, HC 98; The working of the Police Complaints Authority was examined in the 1997-98 First Report, ‘Police disciplinary and complaints procedures’, HC 258; The working of the Independent Police Complaints Commission was examined in the 2009-10 Eleventh Report, ‘The work of the Independent Police Complaints Commission’, HC 366; and Again in the 2012-13 Eleventh Report, ‘Independent Police Complaints Commission’, 2012/13, HC 494. 4. In addition to the four HAC inquiries mentioned above, inquiries chaired by Lord Scarman into the Brixton Disorders of 1981 (1981-82, Cmnd. 8427) and Lord Macpherson into matters arising from the death of Stephen Lawrence (1998-99, Cm 4262), recommended reform after considering the effectiveness of, and public confidence in the police complaints system. Four overarching questions 5. It is evident that despite several attempts meaningful reform of the police complaints system has proved unattainable up to the present time. It is suggested that four overarching questions relevant to the rationale, procedures and institutional framework for handling complaints help understand why progress has been limited: (PCO0010) Public confidence question: why does the lack of public confidence in the police complaints system remain a pressing concern despite the operation of four oversight bodies over the course of the last 40 years or so, each of which was introduced for the purpose of improving public confidence? Police and public alignment question: are police management standards of acceptable officer conduct and behaviour and complaints procedures, as overseen by oversight bodies, aligned with public expectations? Interests of complainants question: do police forces and oversight bodies adequately address the interests of complainants? Accountability question: is priority given to the complaints system as an open and transparent police accountability mechanism? Independent Police Complaints Review and Reform Panel 6. It is proposed that a holistic approach is required to address the above four questions which, firstly, draws on the experiences of all stakeholders and, secondly, examines the lessons learned during the last fifty years or so. 7. In light of the elusiveness of a police complaints system that is fair and effective to all stakeholders, in regard to design, implementation and operation, it is proposed that an independent review and reform project is required that, in the interest of obtaining the full and meaningful participation of complainants, should be institutionally and culturally separate from all bodies with statutory responsibilities for policing. 8. It is proposed that in furtherance of this aim an Independent Police Complaints Review and Reform Panel should be appointed. The first task of the Panel would be to complete a comprehensive review of past and present police complaints procedures, following which there would be an appraisal of how to maintain and develop the knowledge and skills accumulated and move forward to the reform stage. 9. It follows from the above proposal that a thorough re-examination of the police complaints system is necessary that goes further than the terms of reference as set out by the HAC for the Inquiry on Police Conduct and Complaints. 10. For example, a thorough examination of ‘the role and remit of the IOPC within the police conduct and discipline system’, would have to address a range of questions, including: Is the IOPC an independent oversight body? o How are the Director and personnel appointed? o What are the exclusionary criteria for appointments? o Are the Director, regional directors and members of staff sufficiently separate institutionally and culturally from the police? o At every level of the Office are directors and members of staff representative of the population at large? o What mechanisms are in place for holding the Director, regional directors and members of staff to account? Is the IOPC sufficiently resourced? Is the IOPC an effective oversight body? o Of complaints handled by police? o Thematic investigations? (PCO0010) o Lesson learning opportunities? Are IOPC investigations of complaints independent and effective? Are they impartial and free from the biases associated with police practices and cultures; thorough; prompt; subject to public scrutiny; and is there meaningful engagement with the complainant in accordance with international human rights law standards? Are the statutory powers, duties and responsibilities of the IOPC sufficiently robust that they are not undermined by police and Crown Prosecution Service (CPS)? o To what extent are delays to investigations and any ensuing criminal or disciplinary outcomes due to lack of police and CPS co-operation with the IOPC? o Is there evidence of failure of police and/or CPS to apply the same decision making standards to criminal proceedings against police officers and citizens? Who is responsible for complaints investigation standards – particularly re evidence? (This will be clarified by the Court of Appeal in the forthcoming ruling on the evidential threshold for a charge of gross misconduct relating to a fatal police shooting in the Officer W 80 application). What, if any, responsibilities should the IOPC have in police discipline procedures? Are the independence and effectiveness of IOPC investigations and their duty to maintain public confidence in the complaints system at risk as the result of insufficient involvement in discipline procedures arising from a complaint? What powers are available to the IOPC to ensure compliance with complaints investigation standards? What sanctions apply in the event of failure on the part of IOPC, CPS or police personnel to adhere to IOPC investigation, CPS prosecution or police discipline procedures in cases arising from public complaints? Should there be a statutory offence of obstructing a police complaints investigator in the execution of their duty? September 2020.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 90203NCJRS.Pdf
    If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov. I." :-:')'," , ~c">"'" ill' .. "J! . l' 0, • ~l ! 1 o ,~ ..~ . .;I' ,.}/" 'v {f. REPORT OF THE CHIEF CONSTABLE OF THE '\ WEST MIDLANDS POLICE ,j FOR THE J I YEAR 1982 U.S. Department of Justice 90203 National Institute of Justice This document has been reproduced exactly as received from the person or orgamzation originating It. Pomts of vIew or opimons stated in this document are tho..le of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official posltJon or polIcies of the National Institute of JustIce. Chief Constable's Office PermIssion to reproduce this COPYrighted material has been Lloyd House granted by Colmore Circus Queensway --tio...r:J:humhria .-l?o...l.J..ce-__ ~. __ Birmingham 84 6NQ He adquar_t e r S ___ 'h._____ _ to the National Criminal Justice Reference SelVice (NCJRS). Further reproduction outSide of the NCJRS system requires permis­ sion of the cOPYright owner. r WEST MIDLANDS POLICE I. MEMBERS OF THE POLICE AUTHORITY Chairman: Councillor E T Shore (Birmingham, SaZtley) I ; Vice-Chairman: ·Co~ncillor T J Savage (Birmingham, Erdington) Local Authority Representatives Magistrate Members Ward Councillor D M Ablett (Dudley, No. 6) J D Baker Esq JP FCA Councillor D Benny JP (Birmingham, Sandwell) K H Barker Esq Councillor E I Bentley (MerideiYl, No.1) OBE DL JP FRIeS Councillor D Fysh (Wolverhampton. No.4) Captain. J E Heydon Councillor J Hunte (Birmingbam, Handsworth) ERD JP Councillor K RIson (Stourbridge, No.1) S B Jackson EsqJP FCA Councillor
    [Show full text]
  • Towards Greater Public Confidence
    Towards greater public confidence A personal review of the current police complaints system for England and Wales Deborah Glass Commissioner Independent Police Complaints Commission March 2014 Foreword I will soon be stepping down after thirteen years of working within the police complaints system: ten years as a Commissioner of the Independent Police Complaints Commission from its inception and three years before that as a Member of the departing Police Complaints Authority. Ten years into its existence the IPCC is poised to expand its investigative remit to “all serious and sensitive cases”. But is this enough to generate public confidence, or does the system itself need reforming? Much has been said and written about the police complaints system in England and Wales over many decades – from academic treatises and Parliamentary reports to tirades and blogs. Some speak from direct personal experience – of how their complaint was dealt with, or the investigation into the death of a loved one. Others reflect collected experience, from the point of view of a campaign group, and yet others reflect a personal or political ideology. This paper reflects my own experience. In the past thirteen years I have dealt with complaints ranging from the most serious and substantiated allegations of criminal conduct by police officers, through the many, varied and understandable gripes of people dissatisfied with the police, to the frivolous and occasionally malicious. From that experience, I have no doubt that, while there have been improvements over the years and some real success stories, the system needs major reform. It has in fact needed it for decades, and has suffered from repeated piecemeal attempts at reform that tighten a bolt in the engine while loosening a few screws in the chassis.
    [Show full text]
  • Governing the American Police: Wrestling with the Problems of Democracy Samuel Walker
    University of Chicago Legal Forum Volume 2016 Article 15 2016 Governing the American Police: Wrestling with the Problems of Democracy Samuel Walker Follow this and additional works at: http://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/uclf Recommended Citation Walker, Samuel (2016) "Governing the American Police: Wrestling with the Problems of Democracy," University of Chicago Legal Forum: Vol. 2016 , Article 15. Available at: http://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/uclf/vol2016/iss1/15 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Chicago Unbound. It has been accepted for inclusion in University of Chicago Legal Forum by an authorized editor of Chicago Unbound. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Governing the American Police: Wrestling with the Problems of Democracy Samuel Walkert I. INTRODUCTION: GOVERNING THE AMERICAN POLICE-AND THE PROBLEM WITH DEMOCRACY Winston Churchill, the famed Prime Minister of England, once observed that "it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time."' Churchill's trenchant remark well states the problem of governing the police in the United States. For many decades, and not simply in the period since the tragic events in Ferguson, Missouri, in August 2014, critics of the police have charged that the police are "out of control," 2 and a "law unto themselves," 3 acting with little regard for the law and standards of human decency. The melancholic truth, however, is that the police are not out of control in terms of democratic self- government. City police forces, which are the focus of our current national police crisis and also the subject of this Article, are directly controlled by popularly elected mayors and city councils.
    [Show full text]
  • Committee on Equality and Non-Discrimination Tackling Racism
    Provisional version Committee on Equality and Non-Discrimination Tackling racism in the police Report1 Rapporteur: Mr David DAVIES, United Kingdom, European Democrat Group A. Draft resolution 1. The Assembly regrets that racism does not spare any level of society and that no institution appears immune to racism. The police is no exception. Racism can be present in the attitudes or behaviour of police officers, in their interaction with the population or with other officers. It can also be found in rules and regulations applied by the police, which would in that case qualify as institutional racism. 2. Among these, the Assembly is particularly concerned by racial profiling. It corresponds to the use by the police, with no objective and reasonable justification, of grounds such as race, colour, language, religion, nationality or national or ethnic origin in control, surveillance or investigation activities. Racist behaviours and practices within the police against visible minorities have a negative impact on the public opinion and increase the level of stereotyping and prejudice. 3. Considering that the acknowledgement of the existence of a problem is the first step towards its solution, the Assembly encourages all member states to look at the situation in their respective countries and dare to acknowledge and address, when relevant, the existence of racism in the police. There can be no impunity for manifestations of racism within or by the police and police officers must be held accountable individually for their behaviour. 4. Few Council of Europe member states have established independent police complaints mechanisms. Effective and independent investigations of racist crimes should be conducted and treated as a priority in order to maintain trust in the police and to encourage reporting on such crimes.
    [Show full text]
  • Police Act 1976
    Status: This is the original version (as it was originally enacted). Police Act 1976 1976 CHAPTER 46 An Act to Establish a Police Complaints Board with functions relating to complaints from the public against members of police forces in England and Wales; to amend the law relating to the discipline of those forces; and for connected purposes. [6 August 1976] BE IT ENACTED by the Queen's most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:— PART I COMPLAINTS AGAINST THE POLICE 1 The Police Complaints Board (1) For the purposes of this Part of this Act there shall be a board known as the Police Complaints Board consisting of not less than nine members appointed by the Prime Minister. (2) The members of the Board shall not include any person who is or has been a constable in any part of the United Kingdom. (3) Persons may be appointed as whole-time or part-time members of the Board. (4) The Prime Minister shall appoint— (a) one of the members of the Board to be chairman; and (b) either one or two members of the Board (as he may decide) to be deputy chairman or deputy chairmen. (5) The Schedule to this Act shall have effect with respect to the Board. 2 Police Act 1976 (c. 46) PART I – Complaints Against the Police Document Generated: 2021-06-02 Status: This is the original version (as it was originally enacted).
    [Show full text]
  • THE CHIEF CONSTABLE of the Report J WEST MIDLANDS POLICE
    If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov. "' I I 1 f1 ! I "/, REPORT OF / THE CHIEF CONSTABLE OF THE Report j WEST MIDLANDS POLICE FOR THE OF YEAR 1980 THE CHIEF CONSTABLE OF THE j IWEST MIDLANDS POLICE Chie-f Constable's Office Lloyd House Colmore Circus Que~nsway Birmingham B46NQ 1980 " / -----. - ---" ~-- -"- - --------------------- ! \ WEST MIDLANDS POLICE MEMBERS OF THE POLICE AUTHORITY Chairman: Councillor R A Wooton (Sutton Coldfield No.2) Vice-Chairman: Councillor J A Clark JP (West Bromwich No.1) Local Authority Representatives Magistrate Members ... Ward Councillor DR H Birbeck (Sutton Coldfield No.3) ] D Baker Esq JP Councillor JAW Bird (Wolverhampton No.4) K H Barker Esq. Councillor J A Gopsill FCCA (Birmingham, Kings OBE,DL]P FCIS Norton) MrsFMLee]P Councillor R Griffiths (Dudley No.4) J G Pearson Esq JP Councillor W T Harris (Dudley No.6) U.S. Department of Justice 77897 Mrs K E Piddock JP Councillor D Harty JP (Dudley No.7) National Institute of Justice C F Redgrave Esq] P Councillor K RIson (Stourbridge No. 1) This document has been reproduced exactly as received from the R J Smith Esq JP person or organization originating it. Points of view or opinions stat~d Councillor P J Lynne (Birmingham, Stechford) in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily C I Teeling Esq ] P represent the official position or policies of the National Institute of Councillor Mrs F M Milne (A IdridgelBrownhills No. 3) Justice. Councillor Mrs JAD Seccombe JP(Birmingham, Acocks Green) Permission to reproduce this copyrighted material has been Councillor E T Shore (Birmingham, Saltley) granted by Councillor B V Smith BSc (Birmingham, Kingstanding) Leslie Sharp/West Midlands Police MBA, Dip 1M , Force Councillor MrsM E Stoneman (Covent~y No.2) to the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS).
    [Show full text]
  • Ull History Centre: Records of the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO)
    Hull History Centre: Records of the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) U DPO Records of the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) 1856-2005 Accession number: 2015/22, 2016/11, 2016/22 Historical Background: The Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) came into being following a partial merger of the County Chief Constables' Club (established 1858) and the Chief Constables' Association of England and Wales (1896). Both organisations had operated primarily for social purposes, with the County Chief Constables' Club providing services for senior officers of County forces, and the Chief Constables' Association providing the same for senior officers of City and Borough Forces. Although providing social events was the primary goal of these organisations, they also considered legal and operational issues. In order to encourage co-operation between the two separate bodies, in 1918 the country was divided into eight districts, with every Chief Constable, whether of a County, City or Borough force, becoming a member of a District Conference. These conferences were also attended by officials from the Home Office, and members of H. M. Inspectors of Constabulary. A Central Conference of Chief Constables first met in March 1918, with the goal of co-ordinating the District Conferences. Until the establishment of the ACPO the Central and District Conferences were the main communication between the Home Office and Chief Police Officers. Work towards amalgamation of the two bodies began in 1943, with drafts of rules for the new association exchanged between the two groups and a letter submitted to the Home Office outlining their intentions. However, in 1945 it was resolved that no further action be taken until the end of the Second World War.
    [Show full text]
  • The History of HER MAJESTY's INSPECTORATE OF
    HER MAJESTY’S CONSTABULARY 1856 to 2006 The history of INSPECTORATE OF INSPECTORATE years 150 THE FIRST The history of Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary – The first 150 years: 1856 to 2006 1-84726-00505 978-1-84726-00505 Ref: 271953 ISBN Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary, Her Majesty’s Floor, Ground Ashley House, 2 Monck Street, London SW1P 2BQ the HMIC website This book is also available from www.inspectorates.homeoffice.gov.uk/hmic by COI on behalf of HMIC Produced July 2006 FOREWORD On 21 July 1856, the statute ability and vision – colleagues to whom the was enacted that brought Her most senior and influential police officers and Majesty’s Inspectorate of politicians in the land have been confident to Constabulary (HMIC) into turn when in need of wise counsel. existence. One hundred and fifty years later, we can look Importantly, however, the sustained success and back on the achievements of influence of the Inspectorate is not just due to HMIC with pride and admiration. An the efforts of HMIs, it is equally reliant on the organisation conceived to ensure the wise individual and collective qualities of all HMIC’s spending of exchequer grants by police forces staff members, whether seconded police officers, has become a catalyst for change and reform, police staff or permanent Civil Service the guardian of professional standards and the employees. I have been consistently impressed credible conscience of the Police Service in by the capacity for endeavour, the sheer energy England, Wales and Northern Ireland. and enthusiasm, and the untiring dedication to the cause displayed by staff members.
    [Show full text]
  • Police Complaints Procedure England
    Police Complaints Procedure England Gregg fins cattishly. Johnnie is syzygial: she reded rapaciously and emendating her disposer. If affectional or terminatory Corrie usually bing his stupids maneuvers intensively or clucks shortly and at-home, how aggressive is Chalmers? It will outside time harm the reforms to pervasive in. This procedure in england and procedural flaws sufficient. Company who file police employees raise a review process used this they needed, police complaints procedure england but worried they! In england and procedural improvements but occasionally officers shot him on the complaint and dealt with us about the police complaints made about it thinks fit to? This falls into the operational management of Bedfordshire Police Force. What is is correct information? Anonymised examples involving alleged discrimination, not to police complaints procedure england! Who any investigation of england and police complaints procedure england! All complaints are our very seriously. These complaints procedure, police officer should ensure complaints commission of england and procedural improvements. The IOPC is led offer a Director General, Michael Lockwood. General that could provide a third party not tell the procedural guidance and develops the regulations. It may occur best to complain in writing so there you through a arrow of the complaint. Initial stages of! Those victims who had complained or raised concerns described feeling confused, ignored or dismissed. Secretary of complaints procedure of. Gross Misconduct Proceedings being taken against an officer or a member said police staff. The outcome of police complaints procedure england and let you can also seek money in. The investigator will mute you either the fame by myself they we the investigation to be completed.
    [Show full text]
  • Policing the Police in the United Kingdom
    POLICING THE POLICE IN THE UNITED KINGDOM INTRODUCTION Since the late 1950s, the need for an effective system for dealing with complaints against the police has been a “live issue” in the UK (Maguire 1991: 177). Unlike some countries, where responsibility for dealing with complaints against the police Post-Printrests with the national ombudsman as part of the general remit over the way public bodies deal with citizens, the police in the UK are not within the remit of the Parliamentary or local authority ombudsmen. In the UK, the mechanisms that exist for dealing with police complaints have grown up independently of the ombudsmen systems established for other public sector services. Moreover, these specialised mechanisms do not conform to one single model, with the result that the police complaints systems in England and Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland have different features and different levels of external oversight. In all three jurisdictions, recent years have seen a period of change. A new system for police complaints has recently been initiated in England and Wales, with the introduction of the Independent Police Complaints Commission in April 2004; Northern Ireland’s Police Ombudsman, introduced in October 2000, is establishing itself as a high profile and effective office; and Scotland is in the process of considering proposals to change its system for investigating complaints against the police. It is within this context that this paper examines various models for police complaints systems, and reviews the three systems for dealing with complaints against the police within the UK. POLICE COMPLAINTS AND ACCOUNTABILITY 1 In some ways complaints against the police are no different from other complaints by consumers of public services.
    [Show full text]
  • Dorset Police Annual Report
    If you have issues viewing or accessing this file, please contact us at NCJRS.gov. I '.¥ I I I I I I I I I I I I I DORSET POLICE I I ANNUAL REPORT I 1977 I (J- ~." ~',.". ,,' ~. fl. .- -p- I i ;'I I I -I Pol ice Headquarters I WINFRITH I I 'I I ANNUAL REPORT I I of :1 i THE CHIEF CONSTABLE I DORSET POLICE I I 1977 :1 I I ' 'I '.1 Ll: .'., \\ I COff"rENTS I I Page Page ADMINISTRATION AND Roadside Checks 14 ORGANISATION 1 Road Safety Day 13 I Road Safety Qwz Buildings 7 13 Safe Driving and Adult Lectures Civilian Staff 1 13 Traffic/Crime I Complimentary Letters 7 17 Schools and Organisations Criminal Injuries Compensation 6 13 Traffic Accidents Discipline and Complaints 6 14 Vehicle Costing I Establishment 1 13 Vehicles Honours and Awards 7 13 Vehicle Excise Enforcement 14 Organisation and Planning 9 I Owner/Occupier Scheme 9 Personnel Records 8 CRIME 19 Police Cadets 2 I Police Federation 6 Attendance Centre 23 Police Housing 9 Cases of Special Interest 19 Promotions 3 Crime Intelligence Unit 21 I Promotion Examinations 5 Crime Prevention 22 Recruiting 2 Crime Synopsis 19 Revenue Expenditure 10 Drugs 21 I Superintendents Association 6 Escapes from Custody 23 Traffic Wardens 2 Forensic Science Laboratory 21 Wastage 2 Operation Shoreline 19 I Scenes of Crime 21 Statistics of Crime 24-34 WELFARE I 11 Trolley Dropping 21 Benevolent Fund 11 Vice Squad 22 Gurney Fund 12 National Association of Retired I COMMUNICATIONS 35 Police Officers 12 Police Convalescent Home 12 Computerised Managemer+ I Welfare Fund 11 Information System 36 System Configuration
    [Show full text]
  • Britain Since 1945: a Political History, Fifth Edition
    BRITAIN SINCE 1945 Britain since 1945 is the established standard textbook on contemporary British political history since the end of the Second World War. This authoritative chronological survey discusses domestic policy and politics in particular, but also covers external and international relations. The fifth edition of this important book brings the picture to the present by including the following additions: • a new chapter on Tony Blair’s administration including analysis of the London Mayoral elections • new material on John Major in the light of the memoirs of Major, Norman Lamont and new work on the Labour Party at this time • updated statistical data and tables • in-depth coverage of the 1990s and the start of the twenty-first century Britain since 1945 provides a concise and lucid history of Britain from post-war to the present day for all students of contemporary British history and politics. David Childs is Emeritus Professor in the Department of Politics at the University of Nottingham. BRITAIN SINCE 1945 A Political History Fifth edition David Childs London and New York First published 2001 by Routledge 11 New Fetter Lane, London EC4P 4EE Simultaneously published in the USA and Canada by Routledge 29 West 35th Street, New York, NY 10001 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group This edition published in the Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2005. “To purchase your own copy of this or any of Taylor & Francis or Routledge’s collection of thousands of eBooks please go to www.eBookstore.tandf.co.uk.” © 2001 David Childs All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilized in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.
    [Show full text]