Police experts disagree over Bristol officer’s alleged excessive use of force on woman

Two experts who spent decades instructing police officers in the use of force disagreed over whether a Bristol constable may have acted within his training when he allegedly threw a drunken woman to the ground. The retired constabulary trainers were giving evidence on day two of a police misconduct hearing into PC Ashley Tucker.

He is accused of using excessive force against a female during a late-night incident at The Centre on April 16, 2023. The woman, Miss A, who cannot be named for legal reasons, was very intoxicated on a night out with her family and had fallen over at least once before she kicked a metal council bin several times, the hearing at Avon & Somerset Police headquarters in Portishead has been told.

The 33-year-old officer allegedly ran up behind her and almost immediately threw her to the floor without thinking to talk to her. He is also accused of failing to disclose the level of force used and that his actions amounted to sex discrimination because he dealt with two men who were about to have a fight earlier in the evening much more leniently by pulling them apart and ordering them to leave the area.

PC Tucker denies breaching the standards of professional behaviour and gross misconduct and says he acted lawfully and with a policing purpose. He told the panel on day one that he decided to take action because there was a risk of criminal damage and harm to himself, the woman and other members of the public, and that he was concerned that she would flee the scene, so he grabbed her, twisted his body and knocked her off balance.

The Bristol-based constable said she went to the ground much quicker than he expected. Giving evidence on day two of the hearing on Tuesday, February 25, police use-of-force expert Ian Mills said that an officer’s actions that strayed from their training did not necessarily make them wrong, especially in a fast-moving incident when quick decisions were required.

He said a rapid take-down to the ground was a recognised police tactic which helped an officer gain control of a suspect in a controlled way. Mr Mills said in a report to the panel that PC Tucker’s actions were in general in accordance with his training.

Sign up to receive daily news updates and breaking news alerts straight to your inbox for free here.

Cross-examining the witness, barrister Mark Ley-Morgan, representing the constabulary, said PC Tucker’s version of events was that he thought she was a threat to him and would assault him, which the lawyer claimed previously was a “pack of lies” to explain what he did. Mr Ley-Morgan said: “The officer justifies his use of force because he felt she was spoiling for a fight.”

He asked Mr Mills if he still thought PC Tucker acted in line with his training if the panel did not believe his account and instead concluded that he did not hear her shouting aggressively, that she did not pull away from him when he grabbed her and that she did nothing to make him think she was a threat. Mr Mills said: “If none of those elements were there then no.”

But he said that if one of those things were true then he did act in accordance with his training. Asked the same question, the other expert, Alistair Price, agreed that if none of those things were deemed to be the case then PC Tucker went against his training.

But he said it was too simplistic to say that he did follow his training if only one of those things was the case. The barrister asked: “Mr Mills is of the view that if one of those things was present then his actions would be in accordance with his training – do you agree?”

Mr Price replied: “No. It’s an oversimplification to say that if just one of those things was present then the actions were in line with training.” The panel retired to consider its decision and spent day three on Wednesday, February 26, deliberating, and is due to deliver its verdict on Thursday, February 27.