Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By brodie22
I work with a company who offer security services, security guards for offices, constructions sites etc, however they also offer close protection services (bodyguards), they are allowed to carry handcuffs but recently got knocked back for insurance on the actual use of handcuffs as a means of restraint.
I and they, want to know if anyone has an answer to this from a legal/H&S standpoint, i.e. can they use them, or would they be at threat of being sued by the person who was restrained.
I hope someone has experience of this as i cannot get an answer from anyone, we have tried the police and the home office (not to put to much pressure on you guys)
Look forward to your responses.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Dave Merchant Legally, yes; handcuff restraints are not considered an offensive weapon, and there's no specific legislation restricting their use - however for a non-police-officer to restrain anyone requires them to have committed, or be in the process of committing, an arrestable offence, and the methods of restraint used must only be those "reasonably required". You cannot therefore handcuff someone who is agreeing to 'come quietly', nor can you handcuff someone for trespass (as it's not arrestable unless you're a police officer). There have been cases where public-applied handcuffs have resulted in injuries (they tend to do that even when applied correctly) and the security guard has been charged with a section 47 assault on the grounds of excess force, so whilst being legal in principle, it's a very difficult concept to insure against, and the SIA intentionally omits restraint devices from their training syllabus. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/7550671.stm has video about plasticuffs being used by door security staff, if you want an example of them in police-sanctioned use.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By antbruce001
Hi,
Just a quick question relating to the previous reply.
As trespass is a civil matter, are you sure the police can arrest for it? I know they can if criminal damage has occurred but for simple being there?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By RS10
As Dave was stating SIA courses don't include the use of hand-cuffs in the training. I also know a lot of Insurance companies will be very hesitant - you may need a "wrongful arrest" policy included in the insurance.
I did hear of one security company training staff in the use of thumb restraints - again I'd be hesitant in using those.
Even restraining someone can lead to problems - I have witnessed door staff and football stewards being arrested for excessive force etc.
Just because they wear the SIA badge does not mean they are not exempt - justification is the key.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By S T
You will be committing a crime for using hand cuffs in this matter.
You can only sue the person in question via court but have no powers to restrain them. Such restrains would be considered as an assault. An assault consists of a person intentionally or recklessly causing another person to apprehend immediate and unlawful personal violence
You may find definition of ‘Assault’ by Lord Brandon in R v D (1984) useful.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Dave Merchant
S T - I agree a MOP restraining over "simple" trespass would be illegal, but there could well be situations where a security guard encounters someone perpetrating an arrestable offence (burglary or assault being the obvious examples).
It's important to say "simple", as aggravated trespass and some specific categories (trespass on railway or MoD land, trespass with intent to reside, etc.) are criminal.
To clarify on "simple" trespass - in terms of the landowner vs. the trespasser, it's a civil issue of damages and arrest is not possible - however under the 94 Criminal Justice & Public Order Act s61, police officers have powers of arrest in certain situations (there must be damage to property, threats against landowner, or 6 or more vehicles on the land). The arrest is for failure to comply with directions of a police officer, not the initial act of trespass - which is why only the police can perform the arrest. It's fiercely complicated, which is why the SIA and insurance companies prefer to stick to the "don't bother" approach.
Anyhoo.. I hear the sound of AUG1....
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By S T
DAVE,
YOU ARE RIGHT BUT THIS THE VICTIM CAN CLAIM ‘FLASE IMPRISONMENT’. AND THE BURDEN OF PROOF WILL FALL UPON THE DETANIER. WOULD THEY BE ABLE TO PROVE THAT PERSON WERE TO COMMIT AN OFFENCE. ALSO, DETAINING SOMEONE IS SOMETHING BUT WOULD THEY BE ABLE TO JUSTIFY HAVE THE POSSESION OF HAND CUFFS?
PLEASE REFER TO HUMAN RIGHTS ACT 1998
ARTICLE 5
RIGHT TO LIBERTY AND SECURITY
1 Everyone has the right to liberty and security of person. No one shall be deprived of his liberty save in the following cases and in accordance with a procedure prescribed by law:
(c) the lawful arrest or detention of a person effected for the purpose of bringing him before the competent legal authority on reasonable suspicion of having committed an offence or when it is reasonably considered necessary to prevent his committing an offence or fleeing after having done so;
5 Everyone who has been the victim of arrest or detention in contravention of the provisions of this Article shall have an enforceable right to compensation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.