Ministry of Defence Police use of force data: July to September 2020
Updated 12 September 2024
Main points summary
-
43 instances of use of force by Ministry of Defence Police Officers recorded during the period from 1 July 2020 to 30 September 2020
-
The most common reason for use of force was to protect other officer – 26 instances
-
The most commonly recorded impact factor was alcohol - 19 instances
-
The most commonly perceived ethnicity of individuals subject to use of force was White - 34 out of 43 instances
-
The most common outcome was arrested - 32 out of 43 instances
Locations
- In most cases, use of force by MDP Officers took place on streets/highways – 20 recorded instances.
Table 1: Reasons for use of force
Use of Force reason[footnote 1] | Count | |
Protect other Officer | 26 | |
Effect Arrest | 23 | |
Protect Self | 18 | |
Prevent Escape | 16 | |
Prevent Harm | 10 | |
Protect Public | 10 | |
Effect Search | 10 | |
Prevent Offence | 7 | |
Secure Evidence | 4 | |
Protect Subject | 3 | |
Method of Entry | 0 | |
Remove Handcuffs | 0 | |
Other | 0 | |
Total | 127 |
Table 2: Impact factors
Impact factors[footnote 2] | Count | |
Alcohol | 19 | |
Mental Health | 12 | |
Drugs | 12 | |
Prior Knowledge | 11 | |
Possession of a Weapon | 8 | |
Size/Gender/Build | 8 | |
Acute Behavioural Disorder | 0 | |
Crowd | 0 | |
Other | 0 | |
Total | 70 |
Table 3: Primary conduct/behaviour of subject
Primary conduct/behaviour ofsubject[footnote 3] | Count | |
Compliant | 23 | |
Active Resistance | 9 | |
Serious or Aggravated Resistance | 4 | |
Verbal Resistance / Gestures | 4 | |
Aggressive Resistance | 3 | |
Passive Resistance | 0 | |
No Data Available | 0 | |
Total | 43 |
Definitions of the conduct/behaviour categories are provided at End Note [i]
Table 4: Tactics deployed[footnote 4]
Most common | Second most common | Third most common | |
First tactic:43 instances | Compliant Handcuffing - 25 | Non-compliant handcuffing – 5Unarmed skills - 5 | CED – 4Firearms - 4 |
Second tactic:6 instances | Non-Compliant Handcuffing – 2Ground Restraint – 2Shield - 2 |
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 | 1 |
Use of Conducted Energy Device (Taser) | |
CED stun | 0 |
CED fired | 1 |
Firearms | |
Firearm drawn | 2 |
Firearm aimed | 2 |
Firearm fired | 0 |
Officer Injuries
-
Zero officers were assaulted or received minor injuries
-
Zero officers were spat at by the subject
-
Zero officers incurred severe injuries
Subject details[footnote 5]
Table 6: Gender
Perceived gender of the subject | Count |
Male | 33 |
Female | 10 |
Transgender | 0 |
Total | 43 |
Table 7: Age
Perceived age of subject | Count | |
Under 11 years | 0 | |
11-17 years | 3 | |
18 - 34 years | 23 | |
35 - 49 years | 12 | |
50 - 64 years | 0 | |
65 years or over | 0 | |
Not recorded | 5 | |
Total | 43 |
Table 8: Ethnicity
Perceived ethnicity of subject | Count | |
White | 34 | |
Black (or Black British) | 4 | |
Don’t Know | 3 | |
Asian (or Asian British) | 1 | |
Other | 1 | |
Mixed | 0 | |
Total | 43 |
Disabilities
-
All subjects were perceived to have no physical disabilities.
-
In 8 out of 43 incidents, the subjects were perceived to have mental disabilities.
Injuries & medical assistance
-
Zero subjects received minor injuries in an instance where use of force was recorded.
-
Zero instances of medical assistance were required
-
Zero instances of medical assistance were provided
Table 9: Outcomes
Outcome | Count | |
Arrested | 32 | |
Detained (Mental Health Act) | 6 | |
Released/NFA | 5 | |
Hospitalised | 0 | |
Made Off/ Escaped | 0 | |
Fatality | 0 | |
Total | 43 |
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 e.g. 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 e.g. pushing, shoving
Aggressive resistance: A stage above active resistance where physical resistance is more pronounced but has no intention to injure an officer e.g. 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.
-
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. ↩
-
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. ↩
-
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 i. ↩
-
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. ↩
-
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. ↩