Police use of PAVA spray while undertaking constant observations in custody – Essex Police, September 2023

A woman was arrested for breaching bail conditions and taken to custody. She had several warning markers for self-harm and mental ill health and required constant observation. This was carried out by multiple female officers. 

During the woman’s time in custody, a child was also under constant observation in a nearby cell. The child had been known to self-harm while in custody and was being observed by a male police officer. 

The woman behaved aggressively while in custody, swearing and spitting at officers, as well as throwing food at them. The male officer on constant observation of the child’s cell, stepped into the woman’s cell and sprayed PAVA spray towards the woman’s face. PAVA spray is an incapacitant spray. The woman received treatment in custody for irritation. 

We decided to investigate the male officer’s use of force and whether it was in line with local and national legislation, policy and guidance. We considered whether the use of force was proportionate, necessary and justified, and whether the officer breached his constant observation of another detainee. We also investigated whether the woman received sufficient after-care. 

We reviewed body worn video, CCTV from the custody suite and cell, custody logs and observation records for both the woman and child, statements from the officers present, and the male officer’s use of force form and pocket notebook entries. 

We concluded there was no indication that a person serving with the police committed a criminal offence. We did find that the male officer had a case to answer for misconduct with regards to his use of force. We decided that disciplinary proceedings should be brought against the officer and that they should take the form of a misconduct meeting.

We found that the male officer did not have a case to answer with regards to the constant observation of the child. 

The misconduct meeting concluded in April 2025. The officer was found to have breached the standards of professional behaviour but that this did not constitute misconduct. 

The officer will go through the Reflective Practice Review Process, and the force will review its policy on using PAVA spray in custody, making changes as required. Relevant guidance will be given to the sergeant and inspector in the custody suite.

We carefully considered whether there were any 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. 

We found learning opportunities around the instructions given to officers in custody, and the type and use of cells. These were passed to the custody commander to review.