Actions of two officers involved in the arrest of a man - West Midlands Police, June 2016

In June 2016 West Midlands Police officers arrested a man suspected of possessing class A drugs with intent to supply. He was conveyed to an unused custody suite for a strip search, and then to hospital for treatment for a head wound. During this time, he kicked three officers, who all submitted statements to this effect. One of the officers claimed that he had been kicked with enough force to cause him to fall to the floor, injuring his hand in the process. Another officer also submitted a statement to confirm that he witnessed the kick to the first officer and that he saw him fall to the floor.

A review of the CCTV of this incident found that the first officer did not fall to the floor.

We also received information that these three officers, along with another officer, were communicating with each other about the case, despite being given a non-conferring warning telling them not to do so.

The four officers were arrested and interviewed. Their properties were searched and their mobile devices were seized.

In interview, the officer who claimed he had been kicked and the officer who confirmed he had witnessed the kick viewed the CCTV. They admitted there was a discrepancy between the CCTV and their own accounts, and could not provide an adequate explanation as to how this occurred.

The mobile devices we seized were forensically examined and contact between the group examined. This examination produced no evidence to suggest the officers had been communicating about the case, aside from contact that they explained as welfare.

Based on the evidence available the Investigator was of the opinion that there was sufficient evidence upon which a reasonable tribunal, properly directed, could find gross misconduct in respect of the two officers for the validity of allegations of assault made by them against the man, as well as the circumstances surrounding the submission of evidence prepared by them in relation to this matter.

After reviewing our report, the force agreed and held a gross misconduct hearing for both officers in respect of these allegations.

At a gross misconduct held in autumn 2018 the panel took the view that, while CCTV footage did not support the officers’ written accounts, it was accepted that they believed their statements were true at the time they gave them, and were therefore not acting dishonestly.

Neither officer was found by the panel to have breached professional standards over their accounts.