Transparency data

Ministry of Defence Police use of force data: April to June 2019

Updated 12 September 2024

Summary

• 37 instances of use of force by Ministry of Defence Police Officers recorded during the period from 1 January 2019 to 31 March 2019
• the most common reason for use of force was jointly prevent offence and effect arrest: 19 instances
• the most commonly recorded impact factor was alcohol: 15 instances
• the most common perceived ethnicity of individuals subject to use of force was White: 28 out of 37 instances
• the most common outcome was arrested: 28 out of 37 instances.

Locations

In most cases, use of force by MDP Officers took place on street/highways: 15 recorded instances.

Table 1: Reasons for use of force^{[footnote 1]}

Use of force reason	Count
Prevent offence	19
Effect arrest	19
Protect self	17
Protect public	16
Protect other officer	16
Protect subject	7
Effect search	6
Prevent escape	5
Prevent harm	1
Secure evidence	1
Method of entry	0
Remove handcuffs	0
Other	0
Total	107

Table 2: Impact factors^{[footnote 2]}

Impact factors	Count
Alcohol	15
Mental health	11
Drugs	8
Possession of a weapon	5
Size/gender/build	2
Prior knowledge	0
Other	0
Crowd	0
Acute behavioural disorder	0
Total	41

Table 3: Primary conduct/behaviour of subject^{[footnote 3]}

Primary conduct/behaviour of subject	Count
Serious or aggravated resistance	10
Passive resistance	8
Compliant	6
Active resistance	6
Verbal resistance / gestures	5
Aggressive resistance	2
No data available	0
Total	37

Table 4: Tactics deployed^{[footnote 4]}

	Most Common	Second most Common	Third Most Common
First tactic: 37 instances	Compliant handcuffing - 13	Unarmed skills: 7 Non-compliant handcuffing: 7	CED: 5
Second tactic: 2 instances	Ground restraint: 1 Compliant handcuffing: 1

Table 5: Conducted Energy Devices and Firearms deployed

Presentation of Conducted Energy Device (Taser)	Instances
CED drawn	2
CED aimed	0
CED arced	0
CED red dotted	2
Use of Conducted Energy Device (Taser)
CED stun	0
CED fired	1
Firearms
Firearm drawn	1[footnote 5]
Firearm aimed	0
Firearm fired	0

Officer injuries

• 2 officers were assaulted
• 0 officers received injuries
• 0 officers were spat at by the subject
• No officers incurred severe injuries.

Subject details^{[footnote 6]}

Table 6: Gender

Perceived gender of the subject	Count
Male	27
Female	10
Transgender	0
Total	37

Table 7: Age

Perceived age of subject	Count
Under 11 years	0
11 to 17 years	2
18 to 34 years	13
35 to 49 years	9
50 to 64 years	3
65 years or over	2
Not recorded	8
Total	37

Table 8: Ethnicity

Perceived ethnicity of subject	Count
White / White British	28
Black / Black British	4
Not known	4
Asian / Asian British	1
Mixed race	0
Other ethnic origin	0
Total	37

Disabilities

• all subjects were perceived to have no physical disabilities
• in 8 out of 37 incidents, the subjects were perceived to have mental disabilities

Injuries and medical assistance

• 1 subject received minor injuries in an instance where use of force was recorded
• 1 instances of medical assistance was required.

Table 9: Outcomes

Outcome	Count
Arrested	28
Released / No further action	8
Detained (Mental Health Act)	1
Made off / escaped	0
Hospitalised	0
Fatality	0
Total	37

Table 3: Primary conduct behaviour of subjects: Definitions

• Compliant: no resistance to instructions

• Verbal resistance: verbal abuse or gestures made but does not offer any physical resistance for example; verbally swearing, offensive finger gestures

• Passive resistance: resistance that is not physical in nature but is intended to stop an officer or the general public from leading their day-to-day activities for example; sitting in the road, refusing to move

• Active resistance: a form of resistance or obstruction that is mildly physical in nature, for example; pushing, shoving

• Aggressive resistance: a stage above active resistance where physical resistance is more pronounced but has no intention to injure an officer for example; struggling against an officer

• Serious/aggravated resistance: Use of violence against police with the intention to seriously injure or evade arrest for example; striking with a weapon, punching

1. Use of force can be used for several reasons in any given incident; there is a staged escalation process in the Police Service and therefore multiple reasons may be recorded for a single incident. ↩

2. Impact factors are not always relevant to instances of use of force and fewer impact factors than incidents may therefore be recorded. Likewise, it is possible to have multiple impact factors for one incident. ↩

3. Officers use the categories listed to best describe the primary conduct/behaviour of subjects. If the subject displays more than one conduct/behaviour, the officer will only record the most relevant or severe. Definitions of the conduct/behaviour categories are provided at End Note. ↩

4. The breakdown of instances shown against each tactic is limited to ‘Most common’, ‘Second most common, and ‘Third most common’ so, in cases where more than three types of tactics have been used, the corresponding figures for each will not always equate to the total number of instances. In addition, the information provided in Table 4 and any corresponding bullet points does not include specific details on the deployment of Conducted Energy Devices (Tasers) or Firearms; where applicable, that information is provided at Table 5. ↩

5. Relates to an incident that occurred when MDP officers were responding to an urgent request for assistance from a Home Office Police Force. ↩

6. Figures provided relate to the number of instances of use of force and do not always correspond to the specific number of individuals involved. For example, more than one instance of use of force could be attributed to the same person. ↩