Man dies while in custody - Kent Police, October 2017

On 13 October 2017 three Kent Police officers went to a man’s home in Maidstone in order to arrest him. After he was arrested and transported to custody at Tonbridge Police Station, the man collapsed while he was having his fingerprints taken, and died shortly after.

During the post-mortem examination, a plastic bag was found in the man’s stomach. Further tests revealed he had high levels of cocaine in his system.

Our investigators attended the scene on the day of the incident and conducted house-to-house and CCTV enquiries. We obtained a number of statements from officers and members of the public, as well as relevant policies and procedures.

Evidence indicated that officers had attended the man’s home on 13 October to arrest him following a domestic violence incident reported on 1 October. After seeing evidence that the house was occupied, officers decided to force the door, after shouting several warnings through the letter box, due to concerns for the safety of the man’s partner. We were of the opinion no reasonable tribunal could find the officers’ beliefs in this regard were irrational or contrary to the evidence as it presented to them.

Officers forced entry to the property, and accounts indicated that they saw the man place two fingers in his mouth. They asked him and his partner whether he had swallowed something, which was denied, and officers were told the man had been ill. Officers saw no evidence of drug paraphernalia in the home or on the man, and there were no medical signs that the man had anything in his airways. CCTV evidence in custody shows the man talking to officers in a normal manner, and denying having taken any drugs. Officers therefore formed the opinion that the man had not swallowed anything.

Based on the evidence available we found no indication that any person serving with the police may have behaved in a manner that would justify the bringing of disciplinary proceedings, or had committed a criminal offence.

We were of the opinion that the performance of all three officers could be considered unsatisfactory for some of their risk assessment and decisions before forcing entry into the man’s home, including their understanding of their powers of entry.

We were also of the opinion one of the officers should be reminded of the importance of promptly providing the custody sergeant with all information which may be of relevance, given the custody sergeant was not advised of the gagging incident. We also suggested that two officers, who did not turn on their body-worn videos (BWV) when arriving at the address, should be reminded of the force policy that there is a “strong presumption” they will turn their BWV on, particularly when using police powers and attending domestic incidents.

After reviewing our report, Kent Police advised that all three officers would receive management action.

We completed our investigation in August 2018, but waited until the inquest into the man’s death had taken place, in summer 2019, to publish our findings.