IPCC issues findings from investigation into death of Ricky Penfold

The Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) is today issuing the findings from its investigation into the death of Ricky Penfold in the North Woodford area of London, following the conclusion of an inquest.

At the inquest in Walthamstow today (Friday), the jury returned a narrative verdict. The IPCC’s independent investigation concluded that, given all of the circumstances, police officers used a reasonable and justifiable degree of force to restrain Mr Penfold. The officers deployed legitimate techniques and the restraint of Mr Penfold did appear to have been necessary and lawful.

At 1.25am on Monday 20 October 2008, Metropolitan Police Service received a number of calls about a man causing a disturbance in the area of Malvern Avenue and Hale End Road (E4). The callers claim that the man, later identified to be Mr Ricky Penfold (aged 45) of Frinton Drive, was behaving in a disturbed manner. He was reported by a number of witnesses to be carrying some form of weapon.

At 1.30am officers attended a premises on Hale End Road where Mr Penfold was believed to be. Officers located Mr Penfold in the rear garden of the property and called for him to come out. When Mr Penfold appeared, he was reported to be in a confused and agitated state. Officers attempted to apprehend him. During the struggle that followed, Mr Penfold stopped breathing and officers commenced CPR for approximately 10-15 minutes. An ambulance was called at 1.42am which arrived at 1.50am and attempts to resuscitate Mr Penfold continued. Mr Penfold was transferred to Whipps Cross Hospital, where he died on Thursday 23 October 2008.

The Independent Police Complaints Commission was notified of the incident by Metropolitan Police Service later on the Monday morning. The IPCC then undertook a full assessment of all the available evidence and determined that an independent investigation should be undertaken.

The IPCC concluded its investigation last year and handed over its full report to HM Coroner in July 2009. The IPCC has awaited the conclusion of the inquest before publicly issuing its findings. Statements were obtained from Mr Penfold’s family and friends, from 17 neighbours who witnessed the early morning disturbance, from around 15 police officers and police staff, and from paramedics with the London Ambulance Service. The investigation considered the pathologist’s post mortem report, the opinion of police restraint and first aid experts, and statements from medical staff at Whipps Cross Hospital.

IPCC Commissioner, Rachel Cerfontyne, said: “We have examined all available evidence, obtained expert opinion, the accounts of the police officers involved and of independent witnesses, and completed a thorough investigation into police officers’ actions that morning. We have concluded that they acted with appropriate and legitimate use of force in difficult circumstances in detaining Mr Penfold. We have kept Mr Penfold’s family informed throughout our investigation and we would again send our condolences to them at this distressing time.”

The pathologist concluded that Mr Penfold died in hospital after a cardiac arrest in the street, and that the cause of the cardiac arrest was largely due to cocaine ingestion. He found that Mr Penfold was also suffering from ischemic heart disease and this would make toxicity from cocaine more likely. The behaviour exhibited by Mr Penfold prior to his contact with police was consistent with excited delirium, where the victim exhibits confused and violent behaviour as a result of the effects of cocaine. In his view the cardiac arrest had not been caused by the police restraint. The toxicologist found that Mr Penfold had consumed a substantial quantity of cocaine some time prior to his detention.

A number of local residents who witnessed Mr Penfold’s behaviour in the street described him as being barefoot, violent, causing damage and creating a disturbance. Some stated he was carrying a weapon described as a knife or metal bar. Several were woken up by the activity, and made emergency phone calls to the police, including an elderly lady who said he had tried to break into her home.

Consequently police officers were deployed and tasked with dealing with an unknown male who they believed was armed, very disturbed, and attempting to gain entry to the home of a distressed elderly resident. When they located him in a back garden officers were faced with a situation which they considered posed a severe risk to public and their own safety.

There were no independent, direct witnesses of the restraint and detention of Mr Penfold because the struggle took place in a narrow alleyway he had run into. Nor was there any CCTV evidence available. The main five police officers who were involved in his detention describe in their accounts the use of a baton and asps to render Mr Penfold compliant. The police restraint expert reviewed the available evidence and concluded they had applied legitimate and proportionate use of force. The medical action taken by officers once a problem was identified was independently witnessed. Officers appear to have quickly responded to the change in Mr Penfold’s condition after he went still, and adopted appropriate steps to attempt to preserve life.

- ENDS -

Notes for editors

The IPCC has overall responsibility for the police complaints system. Since April 2006 it has taken on responsibility for similar, serious complaints against HM Revenue and Customs and the Serious Organised Crime Agency in England and Wales. The IPCC’s jurisdiction was extended in 2008 to cover UK Border Agency staff exercising police-like powers.

The IPCC has the task of increasing public confidence in the complaint systems and aims to make investigations more open, timely, proportionate and fair.

The IPCC is run by a Chair, ten Operational Commissioners (including two Deputy Chairs) and two Non-executive Commissioners.

Media contact:

Mark Pearson, IPCC Regional Communications Officer (Central Region)

Tel: 0207-166-3239