This is a guest post by my colleague and fellow solicitor, Aidan Walley.
Since their introduction in 2003, Tasers (the brand name for Axon Enterprise’s Conducted Energy Device) are now used by every police force in the UK. Despite popular belief that Tasers are harmless after the initial electrical shock and the Home Office assurances that any officer that carries a Taser is properly trained in its use, they remain dangerous and potentially lethal weapons. It hardly seems that a week goes by without news of an officer facing possible criminal charges over the misuse of a Taser. The victims of that misuse often suffer physical and psychological injuries, with long lasting effects.
Unfortunately for my client Hamish he was the victim of such misuse in September 2020.
After a night in the pub one evening, Hamish witnessed an incident of criminal damage and an affray involving a baton at a corner shop. The suspects fled but Hamish remained nearby until Lincolnshire Police officers, including PC Nicholas Fox, arrived.
Suspecting that Hamish may have been involved in the original incident PC Fox searched Hamish for a weapon under Section 1 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984. Nothing was found on Hamish.
As Hamish was intoxicated and his car was parked nearby, PC Fox suspected that he may have been drink driving and asked Hamish to sit in the rear of the police car for a breath test.
Hamish thought that he was about to be wrongfully arrested for the affray and ran away from the officers. PC Fox briefly gave chase before, without giving a warning, discharging his Taser. The barbs hit Hamish in the lower back and buttocks, and the electric shock caused him to lose control of his body and fall forwards onto the ground. As a result, Hamish sustained a number of injuries from the incident, including a broken bone in his right hand and various injuries to his body and head.
Other officers quickly attended and Hamish was arrested. After speaking with PC Fox about what happened, a Sergeant reprimanded him for discharging the Taser when Hamish was not a threat to the officers or the public. PC Fox replied “It’s fine … I suspected he might have a knife”, despite having searched Hamish himself only a few minutes before.
As Hamish had sustained an injury from the use of a Taser, the incident was subject to a mandatory referral to the Independent Office of Police Conduct (IOPC) by Lincolnshire Police’s Professional Standards Department (PSD). On review, the IOPC directed the PSD to conduct a full investigation of the incident. Hamish also made his own complaint to the PSD.
During the PSD’s investigation, it was noted that in his statement PC Fox stated that he “was within 10 feet of (Hamish) and was keeping up with him as he ran”. Moreover, on his use of force form PC Fox justified the use of force to “protect the public, effect arrest, protect other officers, protect himself, prevent the suspect’s escape and to secure evidence”.
PC Fox further justified the use of the Taser in his threat assessment: “Medium risk of harm to public and officers of injury. Weapons involved used in violent manner against property in a public place. Low regard for public safety. Subjects involved unknown and motivation for actions unknown. Subject behaving in furtive manner avoiding eye contact and giving indications of lying to officers believed untrustworthy”.
Contrast that however against the comments of the Force’s Taser Trainer, who after reviewing the Body Worn Video of PC Fox said: “Taser fired to stop subject. Where is the threat of violence to justify that use of force? That statement alone suggests that Taser was used to stop the subject escaping and running away. There is no mention of a threat of violence. … When asked to sit in the police car he runs away. He still doesn’t offer any violence to PC Fox that I can see, not even a push or shove as he runs off… It appears from [the] BWV that Taser was used to stop the subject running off.”
The Trainer went on to recommend that PC Fox’s Taser permit should be suspended.
The PSD also found that while detaining and searching Hamish, PC Fox failed to give the requisite information required by the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, known by the acronym GOWISELY, or to make a record of the search, resulting in the search being unlawful.
The PSD determined that PC Fox had a case to answer for misconduct and the matter went to an internal misconduct hearing in October 2021. Unsurprisingly for such an internal inquiry, there was a finding of no misconduct against PC Fox, notwithstanding the weight of the evidence against him.
Despite the disappointing outcome of the misconduct meeting, Hamish persevered and instructed my firm. On Hamish’s behalf I pursued a claim for assault and battery occasioning personal injury, as well as false imprisonment.
Lincolnshire Police’s solicitor accepted liability for the unlawful stop and search and the misuse of the Taser, but only offered Hamish £5,000. I had no hesitation in advising Hamish to reject this offer and to obtain medical evidence in support of his claim.
In addition to Hamish’s physical injuries, he was understandably caused significant psychological distress, including panic attacks and recurring nightmares. After a consultation with a consultant psychiatrist, Hamish was diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.
After negotiating with Lincolnshire Police, I am pleased to say that I was able to settle Hamish’s claim for £22,000. While this represents a good result for Hamish in light of his lasting injuries, unfortunately Hamish’s case was not an isolated incident and I have no doubt that there will be similar cases in the future.
Sadly, too many officers cannot be trusted not to play “cops and robbers” with the weapons entrusted to them, nor can the current Police misconduct system be trusted to hold them to account when they do.
There are two primary routes to hold Police officers to account for excessive force and, fortunately only the misconduct system is under the control of the Policing institutions themselves. Specialist actions against the Police lawyers, such as myself who are skilled in bringing compensation claims have our fingers on the trigger of the legal system and are ready to bring claims on behalf of Hamish and anyone else injured by an unlawful use of a Taser.
(The name of my client has been changed.)
You must be logged in to post a comment.