HC Deb 01 August 1984 vol 65 cc306-7W
Mr. Soley

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether Metropolitan police procedures for the case of persons in police custody will be further reviewed taking account of the recommendations made by Dr. Douglas Chambers at the inquest of Mr. James Sullivan on 7 July at St. Pancras coroner's court that (a) current procedures should be strictly monitored at the highest level, (b) an independent and responsive agency should be created to fill the gap created by the new procedures and (c) persons given into the care of a relative by the police should be provided with a written report outlining the circumstances of the person's arrest and why the police had decided to bring him home.

Mr. Hurd

The recommendations in question were made by the jury in the case and forwarded by the coroner to the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis. I understand from the commissioner that Mr. Sullivan fell down the stairs from the top of a bus on the afternoon of 5 April 1984; an ambulance was called but Mr. Sullivan refused treatment and no visible signs of injury were discovered by the ambulancemen or the police officers (who were also present); the police officers arrested Mr. Sullivan at 3.40 pm having formed the opinion that he was drunk. He was taken to Limehouse police station and detained there until 10.15 pm when he was released by the police having been cautioned. After his release he remained in the vicinity of the police station; the police called an ambulance at 10.30 pm despite Mr. Sullivan's denial of illness or injury. The ambulance crew considered that Mr. Sullivan was not in need of any medical treatment and at 12.30 am Mr. Sullivan was taken home by police officers; he was handed over to his brother, who undertook to care for him.

I understand from the commissioner that an investigation is being carried out to determine whether any disciplinary action in respect of individual police officers is called for and also to show whether there are any general lessons to be drawn as to police procedures. The jury's recommendations will be considered together with the report of the investigation.

It would not be right to anticipate the conclusion of the investigation, and what bearing it may have on the matters raised by the jury. Recommendation (b) is not in the power of the commissioner to implement, but so far as the provision of detoxification centres is concerned I would refer the hon. Member to an answer given to his question on Monday 30 July by my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State.

The commissioner reviewed his force orders in relation to the care of persons in custody in October 1983; for the changes made to force instructions. I would refer the hon.

Member to an answer I gave to his question on Friday 27 July. In addition the commissioner introduced on 1 April 1984 a forcewide drunkenness cautioning scheme which created a presumption in favour of cautioning rather than prosecuting drunkenness offenders.

Mr. Soley

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will re-examine and consider amending procedures to prevent the rigid application of current procedures in cases where persons die in police custody, in accordance with the recommendation addressed to the Attorney-General by Dr. Douglas Chambers, the coroner at the inquest of Mr. James Sullivan on 7 July at St. Pancras.

Mr. Hurd

The procedures both for reporting deaths in police custody and, more generally, for the care of detained persons who may be in need of medical treatment, are contained in the consolidated circular to the police on crime and kindred matters, a copy of which is in the Library of the House. I described the practice of the Metropolitan police in regard to those who appear drunk or are insensible in police custody, in the answer I gave to the hon. Member on Friday 27 July. A common theme in these provisions is the importance of keeping a regular check on those who give any indication at all that they may be suffering from a serious medical condition, and the need to err on the side of safety so far as calling in medical advice is concerned.