PoliceOracle.com

'Cell Attack' Sgt Wins Back Job

'Cell Attack' Sgt Wins Back Job

Appeal being considered after Police Appeals Tribunal orders Wiltshire officer reinstated to his former rank.

Date - 3rd December 2011
Courtesy of - Ananova
13 Comments 13 Comments}

A police officer sacked after being accused of throwing a woman head-first onto the concrete floor of a cell has won back his job.

Mark Andrews was dismissed after being caught on CCTV dragging Pamela Somerville, 60, along the floor of a Wiltshire police station before shoving her into a cell.

Ms Somerville needed stitches to a gash above her eye following the incident in July 2008.

“Wiltshire Police Authority 'surprised and disappointed' and considering an appeal”

After losing his job in January, the former soldier appealed to the independent Police Appeals Tribunal, which overturned the decision and ordered that he be reinstated at his former rank of sergeant immediately.

Wiltshire Police and the Wiltshire Police Authority said they were "surprised and disappointed" by the decision and were considering an appeal.

Mr Andrews was jailed for six months in September over the incident, which was reported by another police officer.

But Mr Andrews later appealed and his conviction for assault causing actual bodily harm was quashed by a judge.

Mr Justice Bean said he was satisfied Mr Andrews did not intend to throw Ms Somerville into the cell, and that injuries she suffered were probably caused by her falling to the floor after letting go of the door frame.

She had been detained for failing to provide a sample for a breath test after being found asleep in her car, but denied any wrongdoing and the charges were later dropped.

Mr Andrews, a married father-of-two, told the appeal hearing that she had been unpredictable and abusive to him and his colleagues.

He told the court: "I don't think I did anything wrong.

"She had been holding on to the cell door frame when she suddenly let go. It was like pulling a cork out of a bottle."

A Wiltshire Police spokesman said Mr Andrews had not yet been reinstated and that legal advice will be taken with a view to challenging the ruling.

Do you have an interesting news story? Contact the newsdesk on 01737 648 432
or alternatively get in touch via the contact form.

Categories and Tags

Anonymous Anonymous says...
ian

ian - Sat, 03 December 2011
Thia man should never be allowed back in the Police. I have seen the footage and his behaviour was disgraceful. His "excuse" that the woman was unpredictable and abusive to him and his colleagues does not wash. Hope the legal advice is to bar him from re-entry.
ReportReply

Anonymous

Anonymous - Sat, 03 December 2011
Is this some sort of joke? This man is a convicted criminal. Can someone explain this to me please?
ReportReply

ian

ian - Sat, 03 December 2011
Probably something like the stupid Human Rights Act.
ReportReply

Maverick22

Maverick22 - Sat, 03 December 2011
He is not a convicted criminal, his case was thrown out by the Appeal Court, therefore his is innocent. The woman did not help herself by her behaviour. It's strange that there were five people in the Custody Suite at the time, yet only one complained, perhaps the other four thought she got what she deserved.
ReportReply

STEPHEN

STEPHEN - Mon, 05 December 2011
THE APPEAL SYSTEMS HAVE EXONERATED THIS OFFICER. I FAIL TO SEE WHY THERE SHOULD BE ONE SET OF STANDARDS FOR POLICE OFFICERS AND A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT SET OF STANDARDS FOR THE REST OF OUR SOCIETY.
ReportReply

rsmpsn

rsmpsn - Mon, 05 December 2011
Anon-the article clearly states that the officer was acquittede so is not a 'convicted criminal' as you so ignorantly suiggest. Ian-you have obviously never been put in a position where you have needed to obtain compliance and/or cooperation form a drunk otherwise you may not be so quick to judge. Moving a drunk from one place to another when they are resisting is never pretty and it makes it ever more difficult because the drunk in this instance was a 60yr old woman. They still weigh whatever they weigh and have the same capacity as a man to make the process of manouvering them from one part of the cell block to another very challenging.
ReportReply

ian

ian - Mon, 05 December 2011
rsmpsn--In over 30 years service I dealt with many an aggressive drunk and some were women but this Sgt was OTT.
ReportReply

rsmpsn

rsmpsn - Tue, 06 December 2011
Then thank goodness people aren't convicted by armchair juries and the due process of the court system prevails. I suspect that had cctv been available for the many years prior to now there would be countless occasions of officers with drunk people that to the retrospective viewer the incident would be deemed OTT
ReportReply

Maverick22

Maverick22 - Tue, 06 December 2011
The CC and ACC Geenty(a man who was involved in a death in custody)appear to think they are above the law. The highest court in the land has found the Sgt NOT GUILTY, and the Police Tribunal have order his re-instatement. I hope he gets his job back because people like Moore and Geenty think they are above everything. If you are going to criticise people like Geenty did, you need to be 'whiter than white', at least the woman in the Sgts case didn't die, which is more than can be said about Geenty's case
ReportReply

Anonymous

Anonymous - Tue, 06 December 2011
If this guy had perofmed like that in my day when I was a "skipper" I would have charged him and been very happy to lock him up. He was nothing more than a bully and acted like a villian. This sends out all the wrong messages Jim
ReportReply

Raymond

Raymond - Tue, 06 December 2011
I once had to assist with the arrest if a drunk and disorderly alcoholic. He was 4'6" tall and it took six burly coppers to get him to the station. To look at him you would never have thought he was as strong. This lady was giving much less resistance and the actions of the officer seem to have been excessive.
ReportReply

Gordon

Gordon - Thu, 08 December 2011
Forget the beliefs of those that were not there, the fact is simple I was not there so I do not know and looking at some of the comments on here I would like to believe that they feel the same.
However the point that other persons were present must give some doubts as to what happened and the question asked must be 'why did they not give evidence'

ReportReply

normality?

normality? - Fri, 09 December 2011
Walk in that Officer's shoes on that occasion within the same context of limited resources, pressures, deadlines and fear and manage the same situation. Only then can the armchair critics have any credibility and reliability.
As one who has had a career dealing with drunks, violence, assaults etc including some very difficult officers and one who abhors needless excess force I do not leap to condemn this Officer.
It seems clear that both the criminal court system and the Appeal Tribunal found sufficient gaps in the evidence to both quash the original conviction and order a reinstatement.
This the matter should now lie, the Officer be reinstated immediately with adequate compensation and apologies from his original detractors. He should not be further condemned by armchair critics and left wing leaning politically correct individuals who would quake if they should ever need to confront violent people.
I suspect the underlying reason this matter went to such extreme lengths is what I call the "weak kneed spineless opportunistic politically correct bureaucrats who masquarade as senior Officers.
This species, rather than putting forward a common sense pragmatic perspective that considers the realitiesof confronting and managing societies failures and problems, immediately leap to the career enhancing politically correct option of "hanging any person who wears a uniform". Sadly for this species this is the default option.
One may only wish that common sense will soon prevail in society and we see a trend back to the middle ground.
ReportReply