Use of force, arrest, and transportation of man before his death – Greater Manchester Police, July 2018

In the early hours of a morning, Greater Manchester Police (GMP) received a report from a woman that her partner had taken drugs and was refusing to leave their house. Officers went to the address, but there were no offences being reported and it appeared that the woman was content for her partner to stay in the house.

The woman made several more calls throughout the day to report similar circumstances. Officers attended again, and the partner was asked to leave the area.

The same evening, the woman made a final call to the police to report that her partner climbed in through the window. Officers were deployed immediately, and they found the man outside the address. They made attempts to move the man from the area, but this was unsuccessful and the man was arrested.

After being informed of his arrest, a struggle ensued between the man and the officers, resulting in him being taken to the ground and subject to incapacitant spray. One officer also struck him with his fist and knee.

Once handcuffed, the man was carried to the police van by officers and placed in the rear of it, lying on his front. Police officers discussed his condition as he was breathing, but unresponsive. An ambulance was requested but cancelled within minutes as officers believed the man was in fact responsive. The officers then attempted to re-position the man, so he was sat upright between two affixed seats. This resulted in him being transported to custody while slumped down the side of the van.

At custody, a nurse confirmed that she was unable to find a pulse. The police requested an ambulance and performed CPR. The man was subsequently taken to hospital where he was pronounced dead.

We specifically investigated the circumstances leading up to the death of the man, his detention and arrest by the officers who responded to the reports of disturbance.

During our investigation, we investigated the conduct of all ten officers who attended the property. All were interviewed under caution.

We also obtained statements from witnesses, including neighbours and custody staff. We also reviewed the officers’ body-worn video footage and CCTV from outside the custody building.

Our investigation concluded in August 2019.

We found six officers had a case to answer for gross misconduct for possible breaches of the police standards of professional behaviour regarding conduct and duties and responsibilities. This was in relation to the lack of action or recognition that the man needed medical assistance.

One of the officers was also found to have a case to answer in respect of their use of force during the incident.

We passed a file to the Crown Prosecution Service to consider criminal charges in relation to five of the officers we investigated.

The decision was made not to charge any of them with an offence.

The force agreed and arranged disciplinary proceedings. Following a three-week misconduct hearing in December 2021, the panel found the case was proven at the level of misconduct for four of the officers and they were given written warnings.

A fifth officer was found to have no case to answer. During the hearing, the case against a sixth officer, was dismissed.

None of the misconduct findings related to the use of force against the man.

An inquest held in December 2022, recorded a narrative conclusion that the man died as a result of having suffered a cardiac arrest in the back of a police van after taking cocaine and being involved in a 'significant' and 'high-stressing, physical struggle' with officers.

During this restraint, the inquest heard that an episode of Acute Behavioural Disturbance (ABD) developed.

The Coroner was satisfied that a Prevention of Future Death report was necessary and will write to the College of Policing and National Police Chiefs' Council regarding the training given to officers in England and Wales around ABD.

We carefully considered whether there were any organisational learning opportunities arising from the investigation. We make learning recommendations to improve policing and public confidence in the police complaints system and prevent a recurrence of similar incidents.

Our investigation also identified areas of potential learning for GMP relating to the way detainees who are unable to sit up are transported as well as the training provided to officers to help them recognise when suspects are showing signs of acute behavioural disorder. The force proposed ways to address both and so there was no need for any statutory recommendations in this case.