IPCC issues findings from investigation into Avon and Somerset Constabulary response to firearms incident in Bristol

18 Jun 2014 04:27 PM

The Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) has published its findings from an investigation into the decisions and actions of police officers from Avon and Somerset Constabulary involved in a firearms incident in May 2013.

On Tuesday 7 May 2013, firearms officers attended a house in Keynsham, near Bristol, where Simon Tandy had been reported in possession of a firearm.

During the incident, Mr Tandy who was in a wheelchair, could be seen holding a firearm, later found to be an air rifle. He was instructed by officers to drop the weapon which he failed to comply with. He then raised his weapon and a baton round was discharged by one officer striking him in the centre of his body causing him to lower the weapon. Officers moved forward to restrain Mr Tandy but as they approached he again raised the air rifle, pointing it at the officers. A round from a conventional firearm was then discharged by another officer causing an injury to Mr Tandy’s leg.

Mr Tandy was detained, given first aid at the scene and then taken to hospital. He later recovered from his injuries and was subsequently imprisoned for firearms offences. In October 2013, Mr Tandy made a complaint against Avon and Somerset Constabulary about the incident.

The subsequent investigation by the IPCC found that the discharging of both the baton gun and the conventional firearm were proportionate, reasonable and necessary. The IPCC found no case to answer for misconduct against either officer. The IPCC also identified no organisational learning from the incident.

The independent inv estigation examined police logs and audio recordings of radio transmissions, interviewed the police officers involved and considered accounts from eye-witnesses. It also took account of national guidelines on deploying armed officers.

IPCC Associate Commissioner Guido Liguori said:

“It is evident that the officers involved analysed and assessed a constantly changing and difficult situation. They attempted to interact with Mr Tandy and prevent the situation from escalating but they faced a man in possession of a lethal weapon who posed a threat to himself, the public and officers present”.

“The incident was dealt with along recognised guidelines and there is no evidence Avon and Somerset’s response was in any way deficient. While it is unfortunate that Mr Tandy was shot and injured the officers involved faced a dangerous situation and acted in accordance with their training and the law.”

The IPCC did however criticise the length of time taken to brief Avon and Somerset’s Professional Standards Department as this then impacted on the timeliness of referring the incident to the IPCC .