Darran Hunt

The MATTERS OF CONCERN is as follows:

There appears to be an apparent lacuna or, at least, confusion in respect of training for Police in relation to situations where a detained person puts a potentially harmful substance or item in their mouth.

1. Use of PAVA Spray It has been suggested by the expert during the course of the Inquest that “luck” will determine whether a person sprayed with PAVA spray will inhale or exhale at the point immediately after being sprayed. There is clearly a risk therefore that a person with an object in their mouth could choke on that item if they inhale immediately upon being sprayed. At present there does not appear to be any guidance for officers on whether they should use PAVA spray in the circumstances of this case. Consideration needs to be given to whether guidance/policy should be issued to officers about if and when PAVA spray should ever be deployed in respect of a detainee who is believed to have placed something in their mouth.

2. Forced Search of mouth Clarification is needed on the extent to which individual police forces are expected/mandated to adopt Module12 of the Personal Safety Manual and in particular the practical technique of undertaking a forced search of the mouth. It appears that Dyfed Powys Police have not been trained on the method of forcible search of the mouth whereas South Wales Police have. The concept of a forced search of a detainee’s mouth is in stark contrast to the guidance/direction given by Faculty of Forensic & Legal Medicine (FFLM). Officers are, as part of their training, directed to the FFLM guidance for further reading which provides that a forced search of a detainee’s mouth “is not ever appropriate to prevent the swallowing of an object”. There is significant inconsistency in this area and consideration needs to be given to the status and endorsement that the Police give to the FFLM recommendations in its guidance entitled “Management of Choking in Police Care & Custody – Recommendations for Police Personnel”. Consideration should also be given to whether the FFLM recommendations apply in the context of just custody suites or more widely such as in the street (as in this case).

It is of concern that there is a 2006 case with not too dissimilar facts in the South Wales Police Force area. In that case, the lack of training in relation to the forced search of the mouth of a detainee and control and restrain where a detainee has been seen to put something in their mouth were issues highlighted by the Inquest. One of the recommendations of the Preventing Future Death’s Report in that case was that officers should be trained in the technique of forced searching of the mouth. There is an apparent shortcoming in the cascading of information across the different police forces.