UK: Police batons cause lasting injuries
01 January 1999
Police chiefs have been urged, in a Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) report into police use of batons, to abandon "aggressive" US-style policing tactics when training officers. The study, Striking a balance: the police use of new batons, also recommends that police do not use the heavier American designed batons to hit suspects on "vulnerable" areas of the body, such the kneecaps and shins, because of fears that the blows will cause long term injuries.
The two-year CPS study, which was published last December, considers three categories of new US-style batons:
* The Monadnock PR-24 side-handled baton: This has an aluminium frame with a shaft made either of polycarbonate plastic or aluminium. It is available in rigid and extendable form, weighing 611 grams and measuring 35cm when closed and just over 60cm when extended.
* The straight friction lock extendable baton: This category, which includes Monadnock, CASCO and Asp versions, weighs 561 grams and extends from 13cm to 39cm when extended. "It is made of hollow gun metal and sends shock waves along the fluid of the limb when struck" creating "temporary disfunction..."
* The Arnald baton: This baton is produced as a solid or hollow nylon shaft and handle with a ring of rubber dividing the two sections. It weighs 489-585 grams depending on length and does not extend.
Concern is expressed about two of the three designs, and is particularly acute over the use of the rigid version of the PR-24 side-handled baton which "appears to be involved in most of the baton related complaints in each of the two years studied." The report also notes that the Asp straight friction lock extendable baton was introduced from the USA along with a training manual "which was barely amended to take account of UK conditions. This may have led to an unnecessarily aggressive style of baton training and use." This observation led to the report belatedly recommending that forces "still using the original baton training manuals [should] consider amending these to take account of the less aggressive style of policing used in this Country..." The Arnald baton produced less complaints than the others.
The report also includes a section on "Potential dangers" which notes that while training manuals pinpoint areas where a strike may cause serious injury or death (these include the temple, ears, eyes, bridge of the nose, upper lip, throat, collarbone, knee joint and the hollow behind the ear) other target areas cause concern:
"...the knee joint which can be dislocated or fractured by a baton blow, is a primary target area and the shin, again vulnerable to fracture, is given as a secondary target area. The Authority has some concern about such target areas and suggests that forces may wish to revisit the issue in the light of experience."
This leads the report to suggest "amending" the manuals and increasing "refresher training".
Finally, the report observes that following the introduction of CS spray the PCA predicted a decrease in the use of batons and, as a result, a fall in baton related complaints. However, despite the "increasing use of CS spray" 17 forces had more baton related complaints (19 fell and six remained the same) and the average baton complaints coefficient remained the same suggesting that "there has probably not yet been a significant reduction in the use of the baton despite the increase of CS spray."
Police Complaints Authority "Striking a balance: the police use of new batons" (Crown) 1998 £4. ISBN 0-9533157-1-1; Police Complaints Authority press release 30.12.98.