Use of force and family liaison examined after man experiences possible ABD – Merseyside Police, April 2023

A member of the public called Merseyside Police to report a man had forced open the door to his home. The incident was recorded as a burglary in progress and required an emergency response. Radio transmissions of this information were passed to officers, along with a description of the man. Numerous police patrols were allocated and sent to the scene.

A woman also called the police to report sounds of a disturbance at another house. She said she could hear someone shouting for help.

The police found a man in the kitchen of one of these properties. The kitchen was in disarray, and the man was rolling around on the floor in a distressed state. Officers tried to arrest the man on suspicion of burglary, but he resisted. Officers used force to apply handcuffs to the man, including punching his arm, kicking his lower back and standing on his ankles to prevent him from continuing to kick out, eventually applying leg restraints.

The man’s demeanour changed and he stopped kicking. Officers removed the man’s handcuffs and leg restraints and gave first aid. They called an ambulance, reporting that the man may be experiencing Acute Behavioural Disturbance (ABD) to the control room. The man sadly died in hospital.

We received a death or serious injury referral from the force and decided to independently investigate the nature and extent of police contact with the man, including the actions and decisions that were taken in response to the initial calls made to the police and by officers at the scene. We considered whether the force used by officers was necessary, proportionate and reasonable in the circumstances. We also examined the first aid the man was given and whether the police acted in line with relevant local and national policies and procedures.

The man’s family also complained about their contact with the police on the day of the incident and afterwards. They complained they were not given any effective family liaison, information or support. We decided to independently investigate the police contact with the man’s family, including that of police officers and the designated family liaison officer.

We took statements from the officers’ present and reviewed their body worn video footage. We analysed their actions and decisions in accordance with relevant policy and legislation. We also took statements from witnesses and reviewed incident logs.

We concluded there was no indication that a person serving with the police committed a criminal offence or behaved in a manner to justify disciplinary proceedings. We found that the force used by officers was reasonable, using the minimum amount necessary to arrest the man. Although strikes were used by officers, they were to the man’s limbs in order to gain enough control to apply handcuffs. Our evidence found that the officers responded to the man’s health concerns as a medical emergency, requesting an ambulance and monitoring his breathing.

We also found that the service the man’s family received from the police was acceptable. Officers and paramedics provided as much information as they could regarding the circumstances of the incident and the man’s condition, albeit the information available at that time was limited and changes to the man’s medical state were fast paced. We also found the service provided by family liaison officers was acceptable.

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 did not identify any organisational learning in this case. However, we did recommend that officers be reminded about their training in ABD to inform similar incidents in the future.

We also recommended that one of the officers would benefit from reflecting on the language they used during this incident. We found it to be unprofessional, offensive and capable of undermining public confidence in policing.