FOI 130/25 Use of Handcuffs
Enquiry Reference: 130-25
I write in connection with regards to your Freedom of Information request. Below is your request and our response.
The forces use of force policy and any associated guidance. This can be redacted but specifically requiring anything that governs the practice of "compliant handcuffing" as well as anything the force has issued to officers and/or supervisors/investigators/psd that supports or advises against its practice.
- a) We do not have a specific use of force policy we follow the National APP.
Any elements of your officer safety training material/handouts that covers "compliant handcuffing". For clarity I do not require the operational detail of how officers are trained to handcuff either compliant or non-compliant individuals but what the forces teaches them in respect of it as a power and how and when it should be used in an operational policing context.
- a) The Application of Handcuffs & Removal is the responsibility of the Officer and justified by application of the NDM (National Decision Model).
The application of Handcuffs by a Police Officer can be done for the following reasons.
To protect themselves or others, including the subject and to prevent an escape.
The decision to handcuff should be based on subjective criteria gathered by the officer and based on the circumstances as the incident develops.
The 3 anatomically correct positions for Handcuffing are shown below and when applied in this way reduce the injury potential to the subject to its lowest level.
The techniques ideally remain the same the only change can be the position of the subject, i.e., whether they are stood, prone or kneeling.
Cleveland Police prioritise the Back-to-Back Technique for ease of application and control.
Officers are further taught, in fitting handcuffs, that:
Basic Principles: Handcuffs are applied at the narrowest part of the wrist(side) and as close to the hand as possible.
Following application, the cuffs should be checked for tightness; ask, look and feel.
Handcuffs should be Double Locked after application if it is safe to do so, both for the officer and subject.
Officers should never handcuff themselves to a subject. Handcuffing subject to subject is not good practice and neither is attaching subject to fixed objects and would need to be justified.”
The forces official stance on the "widespread" or "routine" use of "compliant handcuffing"
- a) Information is defined in section 84 of the Act as 'information recorded in any form'. The Act therefore only extends to requests for recorded information. Explanations, clarifications or comments on the public authority’s business is not a valid question.
How many times (and the outcomes if any) in 2024, 2023 and 2022 "compliant handcuffing" has been deemed either unjustified (and as such was excessive use of force) or inappropriate for the circumstances at the time (these terms are not set in stone and should be taken to mean the number of times this practice was viewed in a negative light" either by: The Professional Standards Team (or similar), the local policing body (e.g. The Offices of the Police and Crime Commissioner), HMICFRS or any and all independent mechanisms that exist for the scrutinising of the police use of force. If there is an issue with the wording or cost limit of this request, please contact me before refusing it.
- a) See below numbers.
2022 – 1 the result being unable to determine
2033 – 1 service not acceptable
2024 – 0
The forces complaints policy.
- a) The OPCC deals with complaints you would need to be requested this from them.
Having made enquiries above is all the information we hold.
The Cleveland Police response to your request is unique and it should be noted that Police Forces do not use generic systems or identical procedures to capture and record data therefore responses from Cleveland Police should not be used as a comparison with any other force response you receive.
If you are not satisfied with this response or any actions taken in dealing with your request, you have the right to request an independent internal review of your case under our review procedure. The Freedom of Information Code of Practice (see below link) states that a request for internal review should be made within 20 working days of the date on this response or 40 working days if extenuating circumstances to account for the delay can be evidenced. Public authorities are not obliged to accept internal reviews after this date.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/freedom-of-information-code-of-practice
Yours sincerely
Information Rights Decision Maker