It is not unusual for police to swear at people in custody, a police misconduct hearing has been told. The comments from an expert witness came as the panel was shown video footage in which a police sergeant facing allegations of using unlawful force on a detainee can be heard telling the man “don’t be a f****** p****”.
Police Sergeant Rhodri Davies was on duty as a custody sergeant at Swansea Central police station on October 24, 2022 when Tariq Evans was arrested and brought in by officers. It is alleged that Sgt Davies used unnecessary, disproportionate and unreasonable force on Mr Evans when he was brought in with his hands cuffed behind his back after an incident in the Morriston area of the city.
During the week-long hearing in Bridgend the panel was told that Sgt Davies “took” Mr Evans to the ground and then brought him to his feet by the handcuffs in an “unsafe” technique and also struck him several times as well as holding him in a “dangerous restraint”. But former Metropolitan Police officer Martin Graves told day five of the hearing on Friday, January 10 that after studying body cam and CCTV footage from the police station over many hours he could see nothing wrong with how Sgt Davies had responded. For the latest Welsh news delivered to your inbox sign up to our newsletter
The hearing had been told Mr Evans was an aggressive and agitated detainee weighing 17 stone, “athletically built” and around 6ft 6in tall, who may have been under the influence of drugs. He had already assaulted and threatened officers during arrest and in the 15 minute drive to the police station, the hearing was told.
Jonathan Walters, representing the police authority, highlighted how video footage from inside Swansea Central police station played at the hearing shows Sgt Davies raising his arm in what appears to be blows to Mr Evans after he has been felled to the ground. But it cannot be seen where the blows land, Mr Graves pointed out. And what seems to be the sounds of Mr Evans being slapped on the footage was in fact blue rubber gloves worn by officers being “twanged”, the former officer claimed.
Asked by panel chair Christopher McKay about the repeated swearing that can be heard and whether this would be expected of police officers Mr Graves said that it could be. He added that swearing could be an effective means of communication with some detainees.
“It is not unusual for officers to swear or use firm tones to verbally dominate,” Mr Graves told the hearing. “Whether, however, I would have used the same words, I probably would not have had.
“If it happened during training I would have challenged it. But it is not unusual to see officers swearing and using what is perceived as aggressive tones.”
He added: “Communication has to be relevant to the individual you are dealing with. Sometimes swearing is a common language with certain individuals. Would I have used this language? Probably not.”
Asked by the panel chair whether swearing could make an already tense situation worse Mr Graves agreed it could, but “not always”. In another clip shown to the hearing Sgt Davies can be seen holding the detainee with another officer and telling him to “shut up”.
Panel chair Christopher McKay told the hearing that Mr Evans “had a marker for ADHD” on his record and asked whether this should have been taken into consideration when officers were dealing with him. He told Mr Graves: “One appreciates Sgt Davies may not have had this information (about ADHD) but when they get a detainee behaving like this is there not a duty for officers to consider mental health issues?
“The problem is he’s being dealt with in this manner we have seen in the video with the warning (that) he has these conditions.” Graves replied that officers often only know if a detainee has mental health issues, or other conditions, after the event. He said their prime concern was for the safety of the public and officers.
Mr Evans had been brought into the station after assaulting people, damaging a vehicle, attempting to damage a fire extinguisher, headbutting a police van and assaulting, biting and attempting to kick a police officer, the hearing had been told. He was aggressive and threatening to such an extent that when he was arrested he was red spotted with a taser, handcuffed and put in leg braces and a spit hood, the hearing was told.
But panel chair Mr McKay said that people in custody could be treated with “consideration” telling Mr Graves: “Is there not a case for them being treated with some consideration and care? You don’t drag someone to the ground unnecessarily.”
Join our WhatsApp news community here for the latest breaking news. You will receive updates from us daily.
The hearing follows the jailing of another police officer for using unreasonable force during the arrest of Mr Evans shortly before he was brought into the custody suite. PC Jack Williams, 27, was recorded on another officer’s body camera beating Mr Evans after chasing him after an allegation of criminal damage.
Williams was found guilty of assault by beating at a trial at Newport Crown Court in August 2023 and jailed for 12 weeks. A separate investigation was then launched after an officer present in the custody suite – PC Steve Rees – alleged that Sgt Davies also used excessive force “for no reason” on the prisoner, the hearing was told.
When he was taken to a cell the custody sergeant then used a “dangerous restraint”, laying his hand in a “C clamp” across the back of his neck and applying pressure, it is alleged.
The allegations in full:
Sgt Davies, who joined South Wales Police in 2004 and became a sergeant in 2009, faces the following allegations, all of which he denies:
That on October 24, 2022, whilst on duty as a custody sergeant at Swansea Central police station custody suite as custody sergeant he breached the following Standards of Professional Behaviour:
Standard 4 – Use of Force. Police officers only use force to the extent that is necessary, proportionate, and reasonable in all circumstances.
Standard 9 – Discreditable Conduct. Police officers do not behave in a manner that discredits the police service or undermines public confidence, whether on or off duty.
It is contended that the officer used force that was unnecessary, disproportionate, and unreasonable and that the force used was unlawful in all the circumstances.
The hearing continues.