Collision involving a police vehicle - Avon and Somerset Constabulary, May 2018

At 11.30pm on 19 May 2018, two Avon and Somerset Constabulary officers in a marked police vehicle responded to a report of a large-scale disturbance at a location in Bristol.

At the time of the collision, the officer driving the vehicle was headed south on a dual carriageway, with the vehicle’s emergency lights activated. The officer went through a red light at a junction with a minor road, and an approaching car with priority at the junction, being driven by a member of the public, collided with the rear offside of the police vehicle.

The member of the public sustained minor facial injuries and broken ribs. The officer’s recorded speed immediately prior to the collision was 61mph. The speed limit for that section of road was 30mph.

Our investigators obtained accounts from eyewitnesses to the collision, and interviewed the police driver under criminal and gross misconduct caution.

They also obtained and reviewed the police vehicle’s in-car data, and commissioned reports from a supervisor in the Avon and Somerset Constabulary Driver Training Unit, and an officer in the force Forensic Collision Reconstruction Unit.

We concluded our investigation in October 2018. We were of the opinion that there was sufficient evidence upon which a reasonable tribunal, properly directed, could find that the officer did not treat the red light as a ‘Give Way,’ as required by police driving training, and they were travelling too fast to be able to negotiate any hazards safely. We were of the view that it would be appropriate for the officer to appear before a misconduct meeting in respect of the incident.

We also submitted a file of evidence to the Crown Prosecution Service. Its conclusion was that, while the evidential threshold was met for an offence of driving without due care, it was not in the public interest to prosecute.

After reviewing our report and our opinions the force did not agree that the officer had a case to answer for misconduct but considered that their performance had been unsatisfactory. They suggested that the officer should attend a ‘Drive 4 Change’ course in March 2019 as part of structured management action, as opposed to attending a misconduct meeting.

We considered their proposal and, in view of the circumstances – particularly the fact this was a single, unintentional, albeit extremely serious error of judgement – we agreed that their proposal was appropriate. We also suggested that the officer’s driving be evaluated as part of the driving course, with a view to putting into place an action plan for any areas where improvement may be required.