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 .