Are you OK with cookies?

We use small files called ‘cookies’ on Some are essential to make the site work, some help us to understand how we can improve your experience, and some are set by third parties. You can choose to turn off the non-essential cookies. Which cookies are you happy for us to use?

6 June 2017: The underlying facts

  1. The Inquiry saw four pieces of footage relating to the use of force on D1538 on 6 June 2017.
  2. The first was covertly recorded by DCO Callum Tulley on 6 June.1 The footage, which is 12 minutes 49 seconds long, begins with Mr Tulley responding to an incident in the arts and crafts room. As he entered the room, raised voices could be heard and several detained people could be seen standing around a large table. Mr Tulley asked them to move aside and, as they did so, the camera focused on D1538, who had an officer on either side of him restraining his arms. These officers were DCM Nick London and DCO Ryan Bromley. D1538 was struggling against the officers’ restraint and Mr Bromley was urging him to calm down.
  3. A manager, DCM Shane Farrell, moved suddenly towards D1538 and took hold of his head, pushing it downwards.

Figure 23: Mr Farrell’s first restraint of D1538’s head

  1. Mr Farrell kept D1538 in this position for approximately four seconds, during which time other detained people in the room called out in protest and moved towards the restraint. The view of D1538 is partially obstructed by Mr London, but D1538 appeared to move backwards before Mr Farrell released his head. It is unclear whether this was a result of him pulling away voluntarily or whether he lost his balance.
  2. D1538 became more resistant to the officers restraining his arms. An officer behind Mr Farrell pushed him back towards D1538 and Mr Farrell took control of D1538’s head a second time. The other detained people were told to leave the room.
  3. After approximately 30 seconds, Mr Farrell released D1538’s head. D1538 began to shout at Mr Farrell, who appeared to be arguing back. Mr Farrell gesticulated forcefully at D1538 and DCM Steven Dix came between the two to speak to D1538.
  4. At this point, it appears from the footage that there were seven officers in the room, five of whom were in close proximity around D1538. In addition, there were two members of Healthcare staff and the teacher, Ms Sarah Walpole.
  5. The staff asked D1538 what had happened and the officers released his arms. D1538 was agitated and swearing, but the details of what he was saying are not clear from the audio. D1538 tried to leave the room but was blocked by staff and told to take a seat. D1538 attempted to explain and demonstrate to the staff what had happened. He was agitated and pacing, and a number of staff gave him instructions to sit down, which he then did, allowing a member of Healthcare to check him for injuries. Ms Walpole explained to Mr Tulley that another detained person had started a fight with D1538 and that this had been unprovoked. Ms Walpole then repeated this information to the other managers and officers. She later recorded the same information in an incident report.2 Mr Dix told D1538 that he would be moved to E Wing while the CCTV cameras were checked to establish what had happened. D1538 walked compliantly out of the room with the officers.
  6. The second piece of footage seen by the Inquiry is from the CCTV camera in the arts and crafts room.3 The footage shows D197 entering the room with a bag in his hand. He walked around the large table until he reached D1538, who was sitting at the table drawing, and began to physically attack him. Other detained people around the table separated D1538 and D197, but D197 attacked D1538 a second time. The other detained people again separated the men and D197 then walked out of the room. Mr Bromley, Mr London and Mr Farrell then entered the room and restrained D1538.
  7. The third piece of footage seen by the Inquiry was covertly recorded by Mr Tulley after the use of force.4 The footage is 34 seconds long and captures a conversation between Mr Tulley and Mr Bromley. Mr Tulley asked, “Did you see Shane?”, and Mr Bromley smiled, slightly shook his head and said, “He took his head clean off. I know.” Mr Bromley added “I hate being the head officer” and “pulled his neck right down. That’s why even [D149]’s mates were [inaudible] and they’re the ones that fight him.
  8. The fourth piece of footage seen by the Inquiry was recorded by Mr Tulley after he finished his shift on 6 June 2017. Mr Tulley recorded a piece to camera about some of the day’s events and described the incident in the arts and crafts room.5 He described Mr Farrell pulling D1538’s head down and escalating the situation. Mr Tulley said that Mr Farrell’s approach was a complete overreaction and was unnecessary. Mr Tulley said that this caused the other detained people to react in protest and resulted in more resistance from D1538: “The behaviour of the manager was ridiculous, it put everyone at risk because you do not know how the other detainees are going to react.It set a shocking example.
  9. Mr London recorded in his incident report that D1538 was taken to E Wing “to calm down”.6 It does not appear that any restrictions were placed on his movement.
  10. In his statement to the Inquiry, D1538 said that he felt he was in serious danger when D197 attacked him on 6 June 2017.7 D1538 described being restrained by Mr Bromley and Mr London, and gave his view that this was “really unfair, I had not done anything wrong – they should have been focusing on [D197] not me”.8 D1538 added:

“The restraint made me much more angry and frustrated as I felt it was really unfair that they were using force against me just after I had experienced such a frightening attack.”8

His statement detailed his recollection of Mr Farrell’s restraint of his head:

“Then from nowhere an officer grabbed my head. This meant I could barely breathe. I was being strangled. It felt like the officer was fighting with my head. They held me very tight, it was painful. This made the situation a lot worse and it made me feel even more frustrated and upset”9

  1. All three officers wrote that Mr Farrell’s restraint had been prompted by D1538 moving his head around in a way that exposed him to injury.10 Mr London and Mr Farrell referred to a cabinet or cupboard being in close proximity to D1538’s head.11
  2. D1538 said that he considered the Use of Force reports submitted by Mr London, Mr Bromley and Mr Farrell to be inaccurate.12 D1538 wrote that it was clear from Mr Tulley’s undercover footage that his head had not been near a cabinet when Mr Farrell restrained it. D1538 said that Mr Farrell’s actions had caused him to fall and had actually put him in greater danger rather than protecting him.13 D1538 wrote that he could not recall whether he was taken to E Wing or to the Care and Separation Unit (CSU). He noted that the Use of Force reports indicated the former, but that a log provided by G4S recorded that he was taken to the CSU.14 D1538 wrote that being isolated after he was the victim of an unprovoked attack felt like a punishment.15 He told the Inquiry that he had attempted to tell the PSU about the 6 June 2017 incident on 15 December 2017, when he attended a meeting to discuss his complaint dated 21 August 2017, but was told that the PSU was only there to discuss the complaints set out in that letter.16 If this is correct, it is concerning.
  3. During his oral evidence to the Inquiry, Mr Farrell was asked by Counsel to the Inquiry about the justification for restraining D1538’s head. After watching Mr Tulley’s covertly recorded footage, Mr Farrell accepted that D1538 was not at risk of hitting his head on a cupboard when he first took control of his head, but maintained that there was a risk of this at the point when he restrained D1538’s head a second time.17 Mr Farrell told the Inquiry that none of the other staff present during the incident expressed a view that the force used was excessive.18
  4. In his oral evidence to the Inquiry, Mr Bromley told the Inquiry that he maintained the view that Mr Farrell took hold of D1538’s head for D1538’s own safety, as there was a risk of him hitting his head on a cabinet.19 Counsel to the Inquiry asked Mr Bromley about the covertly recorded conversation that took place between himself and Mr Tulley after the incident. Mr Bromley accepted that the evidence demonstrated that the conversation had taken place but said that he had no memory of it. Mr Bromley said that he was unable to explain why he said to Mr Tulley “He took his head clean off” and that he was of the view at the time that Mr Farrell’s restraint of D1538’s head was “textbook”.20 Mr Bromley said during his evidence that he was still of that opinion in light of the footage.21
  5. During his oral evidence to the Inquiry, DCM Stephen Loughton said that he had been ‘Oscar 1’ (the operational manager on duty) at the time of the incident in the arts and crafts room.22 Mr Loughton told the Inquiry that he was aware from his review of the incident that no body worn cameras had been activated. He suggested, under questioning by Counsel to the Inquiry, that “Sometimes, when there’s an incident and it happens that quick, you don’t have a chance to put your body-worn camera on.” It is not clear from Mr Loughton’s evidence whether he spoke to any of the officers who had not turned on their cameras.23 When asked by Counsel to the Inquiry why no report of injury form had been completed for D1538, Mr Loughton said that he did not know.24


  1. KENCOV1031 – V2017060600011[]
  2. HOM004133_005[]
  3. Disk 55 6 June 2017 1526[]
  4. KENCOV1033 – V2017061000007[]
  5. TRN0000064_007-010[]
  6. CJS005615_002[]
  7. DL0000231_010 para 45[]
  8. DL0000231_010 para 48[][]
  9. DL0000231_011 para 50[]
  10. CJS005615_008; CJS005615_012; CJS005615_015[]
  11. CJS005615_008; CJS005615_012[]
  12. DL0000231_011 para 52[]
  13. DL0000231_011 para 54[]
  14. CJS000896 tab 2, row 201, column headed ‘Details’[]
  15. DL0000231_018 para 68[]
  16. DL0000231_018 para 73[]
  17. Shane Farrell 8 March 2022 97/16-98/4[]
  18. Shane Farrell 8 March 2022 101/4-102/2[]
  19. Ryan Bromley 7 March 2022 123/10-123/24[]
  20. Ryan Bromley 7 March 2022 125/24-126/10[]
  21. Ryan Bromley 7 March 2022 128/22-129/9[]
  22. Stephen Loughton 1 March 2022 121/14-15[]
  23. Stephen Loughton 1 March 2022 122/15-123/7[]
  24. Stephen Loughton 1 March 2022 123/18-20[]