WIREDGOV

Investigators from the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) yesterday (Monday) served a misconduct notice on a South Wales Police officer as part of the investigation into police contact with Mohamud Mohamed Hassan prior to his death.

The officer attended the Newport Road, Cardiff address on 8 January and accompanied Mr Hassan to Cardiff Bay custody unit in the rear of a police van. During this time period, Mr Hassan was heard on body worn camera to complain of having a fit, suffering a migraine, and displayed signs of experiencing pain.

The misconduct notice relates to this information potentially not being passed to custody staff in charge of Mr Hassan’s welfare.

The serving of a misconduct notice does not necessarily mean an officer has committed any wrongdoing. It is to notify an officer that their conduct is being investigated. The most serious sanction that can be imposed if an officer is subsequently found to have breached professional standards at misconduct level is a written warning.

The independent investigation into the circumstances of Mr Hassan’s tragic death on Saturday 9 January is progressing with a team of investigators continuing to analyse many hours of body-worn video and CCTV footage. 

IOPC Director for Wales, Catrin Evans, yesterday said:

“We are continuing to analyse the footage and piece together other evidence, and we are looking at all the interaction police had with Mr Hassan over the weekend of his death. In the course of an investigation, where an indication arises that an officer may have breached professional standards that may warrant a disciplinary sanction, we serve a disciplinary notice to advise them they are subject to investigation. We have advised Mr Hassan’s family and South Wales Police that we have done so for one officer over possibly not passing information about Mr Hassan’s welfare to the custody sergeant on duty. We keep misconduct notices under review during the course of an investigation. At the conclusion of an investigation the IOPC decides whether any officer under notice has a disciplinary case to answer.”