WIREDGOV

Our investigation after video footage of an arrest in Sandwell appeared on social media has concluded that the use of force by West Midlands Police officers was necessary and proportionate in the circumstances.

We began an investigation following a voluntary referral from the force after the release of video footage, filmed through an open door, showed a man being repeatedly struck around the head by police during an incident on 25 February last year (2019).

We established the officers were responding to a report of an assault on a health worker, which led to them arresting a man at the scene.

IOPC Regional Director Derrick Campbell yesterday said:

“We know the impact these types of incidents have on public confidence in policing so it was important we investigated this incident thoroughly and fairly and that we examine all of the circumstances of the officers’ interactions with the man

“Our investigation found that this eight-second clip, which was widely shared on social media, was not wholly representative of the incident and actions of the officers involved.

“Body worn footage indicated that the officers who entered the property were met with aggression by the man concerned. Without warning one of the officers was struck and injured by one of two metal implements being swung at them.

“Another three officers were then involved in the restraint, one of whom repeatedly struck the man over the head while holding a can of incapacitant spray. While that was unconventional, the man had been violent and was refusing to co-operate and the body worn video supported the officer’s account that he feared for his safety and that of his colleagues. 

“Given the situation the officers faced we were satisfied that the use of force was necessary and proportionate.”

While our investigation concluded that none of the officers had acted in a manner that justified the bringing of disciplinary proceedings, we were of the view one officer should face management action for using inappropriate language. This continued after the man had been brought under control. The force agreed and will carry out management action for the officer concerned.

Concerns were raised by the man and his legal representatives that the way he was dealt with was influenced by discrimination based on his race and/or religion. There was no indication of that in the accounts provided by the health staff present and no audio or other evidence from the body worn video suggesting the man had been discriminated against. We also found nothing of relevance in the conduct records of the officer who we felt had used inappropriate language, although that was not in any way racist.

We also addressed concerns that following his arrest the man had been left face down on the ground outside the property while handcuffed from the rear.

An independent witness and body worn footage indicated that the man was still struggling at this point. We concluded that in these circumstances it was not practicable for the man to be taken out of the prone position.

During our investigation, which concluded in January, we gathered statements from the health staff, the complainant and the officers who were present during the incident. We also reviewed police body worn video and social media footage. The man’s legal representatives have been provided with our report.