Investigation into police contact on two occasions – Staffordshire Police, December 2022

A man contacted the police to complain that a former tenant and family member was refusing to leave his property and causing damage. Officers arrived and the man allegedly assaulted an officer. He was arrested for criminal damage, burglary, assault of an emergency worker and possession of cannabis. He was taken to custody.

The man made a complaint to us about his arrest. The police suspended the investigation into his complaint while the criminal investigation against him was ongoing. The man also complained about false allegations made against him, but these were not investigated.

Six months later the landlord and family member contacted the police again to complain that the man was harassing him. Officers went to the man’s home to arrest him.

The man became agitated and un-cooperative. He climbed out of a ground floor window and made his way into the front garden. The man doused himself in petrol. Officers used an irritant spray to try to stop the situation, but the man set himself alight.

Officers extinguished the flames and gave the man first aid. An ambulance was called. The man was taken to hospital but sadly died.

We received a death or serious injury referral from the force. The man’s wife also complained to us about the way police handled the investigation which had led to the man’s arrest. She also complained about the later police contact that led to the man’s death.

We decided to independently investigate the complaints made about police contact with the man and whether they contributed to his death. We considered whether the man’s arrest during the initial police contact was appropriate, how complaints were handled, and the actions and decisions of officers who went to the property, including what intelligence checks were made, whether the man’s mental health was considered, and the time and number of officers present.

Our investigators obtained accounts from officers and staff, and reviewed material including incident logs and body worn video.

We concluded there was no indication that a person serving with the police committed a criminal offence or behaved in a manner justifying the bringing of disciplinary proceedings.

We found that the actions and decisions of the officers were reasonable and proportionate, and that they could not have foreseen the events that unfolded.

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.