We use some essential cookies to make our website work. We’d like to set additional cookies so we can remember your preferences and understand how you use our site.
You can manage your preferences and cookie settings at any time by clicking on “Customise Cookies” below. For more information on how we use cookies, please see our Cookies notice.
Your cookie preferences have been saved. You can update your cookie settings at any time on the cookies page.
Your cookie preferences have been saved. You can update your cookie settings at any time on the cookies page.
Sorry, there was a technical problem. Please try again.
This site is a beta, which means it's a work in progress and we'll be adding more to it over the next few weeks. Your feedback helps us make things better, so please let us know what you think.
The total number of Use of Force (UoF) incidents this month is 854 (3rd highest in rolling 12 months; 878 last month) with reasons given being effect arrest 487 (57%) and prevent escape (431). The highest outcome was arrest which occurred is 610 (was 553 last month).
Taser was (drawn) on 28 occasions and used twice. As already stated, handcuffing was used on 533 occasions (581 last month) with compliant handcuffing falling slightly from 339 to 311 and non-compliant handcuffing falling from 254 to 222. Pava was drawn on 16 occasions (28 last month) and used on 25 occasions; down from 31. There was a large increase in firearm deployments rising from 9 to 26 (highest level in rolling 12 months).
Handcuffing at arrest – A custody sergeant in the Peterborough has conducted 50 dip samples in the month of September reviewing if the Use of Force form was completed correctly for detainees arriving in custody of which only 4 were incorrect (officers advised). As a result, custody sergeants have been tasked to conduct the same review in Cambridge / Huntingdon.
Handcuffing during Stop and Search
There were 213 person-only stop searches in September of which 94 had UoF recorded (44.1%). Regarding handcuffing there were 70 occasions (32.9% of total SnS) where compliant handcuffing was used and 15 occasions where non-compliant handcuffing was used (7%).
Office/no of UoF |
No. of Use of Force |
Gender |
Ethnicity |
Age (yrs) |
Handcuffing |
Other |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Officer H North Response |
13 |
9x Males 2x Female 2x Not Stated |
3x Asian 2x Black 6x White 2x Not Stated |
6x 18-34 3x 35-49 2x 50-64 2x Not Stated |
7x Cooperative Handcuffing 3x Uncooperative Handcuffing
|
1x Limb Restraint 1x Pava (Used) 4x Unarmed Skills |
Office I Neighbourhood South |
12 |
10x Males 2x Female |
1x Black 11x White |
2x 16 1x 17 5x 18-34 2x 35-49 2x 50-64 |
10x Cooperative Handcuffing 2x Uncooperative Handcuffing |
1x Improvised |
Officer J South Response |
11 |
8x Males 2x Female 1x Not Stated |
1x Black 9x White 1x Not Stated |
2x 18-34 5x 35-49 3x 50-64 1x Not Stated |
3x Cooperative Handcuffing 7x Uncooperative Handcuffing |
1x Improvised 1x Limb Restraint 2x Unarmed Skills |
Officer K South Response |
11 |
9x Males 2x Female |
1x Black 10x White |
1x 16 7x 18-34 3x 35-49 |
3x Uncooperative Handcuffing |
4x Improvised 2x Limb Restraint 6x Unarmed Skills |
Officer L South Response |
10 |
8x Males 2x Female |
9x White 1x Other |
1x 17 4x 18-34 3x 35-49 2x 50-64 |
1x Cooperative Handcuffing 3x Uncooperative Handcuffing |
2x Ground Restraint 6x Improvised 3x Unarmed Skills
|
Officer M South Response |
9 |
9x Males |
1x Asian 8x White |
6x 18-34 2x 35-49 1x 50-64 |
4x Cooperative Handcuffing 3x Uncooperative Handcuffing |
2x Ground Restraint 2x Improvised 1x Unarmed
|
Summary – This is the fourth month where Officer H was the most frequent user, albeit all seem to be proportionate.
There are 4x officers that are all on South Response, 3 from the same relief.
Four of the officers are using their handcuffs more than the force average by a significant amount. When looking into this more deeply it can be seen that this is due to the result being arrest and therefore it is proportionate.
Ref |
Officer |
Age |
Gender |
Ethnicity |
UoF |
Notes |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
UoF-A |
Officer N – North Response |
9 |
Male |
White |
1x Improvised |
Grabbed hold of the suspect by his arms and legs to prevent escape and prevent harm to his mother and officers. |
UoF-B |
Officer O – North Response |
11 |
Female |
White |
1x Un-armed Skills |
Wrist lock used briefly - as the subject was being moved from her address to the van for transport, and it had not been considered appropriate to handcuff her, she was momentarily placed in a wrist lock to maintain control after she kicked the van. |
UoF-C UoF-D |
Officers P & Q – North Response |
12 |
Male |
White |
1x Ground Restraint 1x Uncooperative Handcuffing |
Mental Health |
UoF-E UoF-F |
Officers R & S – North Response |
72 |
Female |
White |
2x Improvised |
Mental Health - Took female by the arm to remove her from neighbours property. |
UoF-G UoF-H |
Officer T – South Response |
78 |
Male |
White |
1x Limb Restraint 1x Improvised |
Mental Health – to assist with transport. |
Summary – 6 of the officers were from North response but this is determined by the nature of calls received as review showed all uses to be proportionate.
Officer O to be congratulated on good proportionate decision making. This has been completed by Supt Sissons.
All other incidents appear to be proportionate.
To formally support the same scrutiny of complaint handcuffing when entering Southern cell blocks (Parkside / Huntingdon) as has occurred at Peterborough.