The Police Ombudsman's office was requested by the Chief Constable to investigate an incident during which four shots were aimed at the tyres a car which had repeatedly rammed police vehicles in Belfast. The shots were discharged by three police officers involved in trying to bring the vehicle to a halt.
The car had been trapped in a narrow terraced residential street lined with residents' cars and was reversing back and forward between a police Land Rover and a squad car which were positioned in front and behind it. At one point the car drove directly at an officer who was forced to jump onto the bonnet of a parked car just before the stolen vehicle collided with it.
After causing serious damage to a number of parked cars the stolen vehicle and its two male occupants drove off from the scene. A female who had been arrested after earlier getting out of the car was later released without charge.
During their investigation , Police Ombudsman investigators seized the three police firearms which had been discharged during the incident and submitted them for forensic examination. Scenes of Crimes specialists examined the stolen car, residents' cars and houses in the street for signs of bullet penetration. Forensic tests were also carried out on the police Land Rover and two private cars, including tests to establish whether a possible strike mark on the Land Rover had been caused by a bullet. A fingertip search of the area was also carried out, and seven civilian witnesses were interviewed.
Outcome of investigation:
After reviewing the evidence, the Police Ombudsman, Mrs Nuala O'Loan, reached the following conclusions:
- The use of guns by the three officers involved was not effective and was highly unlikely to be so. The likelihood of puncturing tyres by such methodology was far from certain, it would not have prevented collision with the officer in any event, and such discharges posed many other dangers to their colleagues and local residents. The issue raises concerns in respect of the training and instruction given to officers.
- Mrs O'Loan accepted that the officers had acted with the best intentions, believing that the life of a colleague was in danger and that the use of their weapons was the only option open to them in attempting to save his life. However, she concluded that the force used was unlikely to have achieved its objective of preventing harm to the officer and posed other real dangers. For that reason it was not proportionate.
- There was a stinger device (a spiked device used to puncture tyres and immobilise vehicles) in one of the police vehicles, but none of the officers was authorised to use the device. It seems its use was not considered by those officers who knew it was available.
- The quality of note taking by the three officers was described in the Police Ombudsman's report as "unprofessional". Notes and statements were not written immediately after the incident as the officers had been on sick leave and wished to seek legal advice. The officers's notebook entries indicated the date of the incident, not the date on which they were made, though the officers did not suggest that they were written on the day of the incident. Similarly, the officers were unable to say exactly when their statements had been written as the date shown on the final typed version indicated when they had been started and not the date of subsequent entries. The Ombudsman's report noted, however: "In fairness to the officers internal PSNI instructions regarding the making of statements and taking of notes generally are unclear and this has recently been brought to the attention of the Chief Constable by the Police Ombudsman with a recommendation that the instructions are reviewed." No disciplinary action was recommended.
- The Police Ombudsman had previously raised concerns about note taking in relation to firearms incidents. As a result the PSNI formed a working group to consider the issue of when notes should be made following firearms discharges and the impact of legal advice and medical opinion on this. The Police Ombudsman is represented on that working group.
Resulting recommendations for police:
- The Police Ombudsman recommended that the topics of crossfire, ricochet, firing at tyres, risk assessment, and the inherent dangers of not considering these areas are included in all initial firearms training and refresher training. PSNI Firearms Branch revealed that all new recruits are shown a video on the effects of ricochet, but not serving officers. Neither does the video cover crossfire or risk assessment. The officers admitted not having considered the backdrop when they were firing, or the danger to local residents and other officers posed by the potential for ricochet. Having considered the overall situation, the Police Ombudsman recommended that the officer's reaction, made in a split second, should not attract any disciplinary sanction.
- The poor quality of note taking would have devalued the worth of the officers' evidence should a case have proceeded to court. The Police Ombudsman recommended that force instructions regarding note taking in relation to firearms incidents be clearly defined following the deliberations of the working group (see point five above). The Ombudsman also recommended that the more general issue of note making and statement writing be reviewed with a view to clear instructions being issued.
- In relation to the stinger device, the Police Ombudsman recommended that the issue may be worthy of review by the force to ensure that such devices are carried or available to those authorised in their use.