Use of force during detention - Greater Manchester Police, November 2015

In November 2015 Greater Manchester Police (GMP) was called to a city centre bar to reports of a man being detained by door staff while attempting to steal a charity collection box. When officers arrived, the man was still struggling with a number of door staff. The officers took over the restraint and took him to custody in the back of a van. Officers reported that the man kicked the side of the van during the journey.

The man was placed before the custody sergeant, where it was reported that he refused to engage. He was taken straight to a cell by the arresting officers so he could be searched, still handcuffed. Officers proceeded to search the man and remove his shoes. The arresting officer reported that he then asked to the man to get to his knees so that his handcuffs could be removed, that the man refused to comply, and that he then explained that force would be have to be used against him. The officer said that he took the decision to take the man to the floor but, as he did so, the man moved and fell to the ground and hit his head on the floor. The man lost three teeth at the time and a fourth one later during restorative surgery.

Our investigation focused on the arresting officer’s decision to take the man to the floor. We obtained CCTV from the custody suite and obtained witness statements from the other police officer, the custody officers and detention officers.

CCTV showed the man walking unaided to the cell and being compliant during the search. CCTV also showed the arresting officer taking the man to the edge of a mat on the floor, placing his leg across the man’s legs and tripping him towards the floor.

We served the arresting officer with a gross misconduct notice and informed him that he would be investigated criminally for an offence of Actual Bodily Harm (ABH).

We interviewed the arresting officer, who provided a written response to the notice of investigation, but did not provide significant justification for the reasons he used force and the necessity for getting the man to the floor. He stated that he felt the man was a threat to him and so had to get him to the floor – which was not evident on CCTV.

Based on the evidence available, we were of the opinion that the arresting officer may have a case to answer for gross misconduct. We concluded our investigation in May 2016.

We also submitted a file of evidence to the Crown Prosecution Service for consideration of a potential criminal offence of ABH. The CPS decided to charge the arresting officer with ABH. At a trial held in February 2018, a jury found him not guilty.

Following the outcome of the trial, we agreed with GMP that a misconduct meeting should still be held.

At the meeting, held in spring 2019, the arresting officer provided no further clarification on his rationale or the necessity to get the man to the floor. The misconduct panel felt that the officer’s actions warranted a final written warning.