A DISABLED 11-year-old girl was locked in handcuffs, a spit hood and leg restraints and held in the cells after being arrested.

The girl was arrested three times for minor offences and detained once under the Mental Health Act, spending more than 60 hours in custody in total.

The 11 Sussex Police officers involved in the incidents escaped misconduct hearings with nine of them given advice.

Two of them have retired before the investigation was completed.

The girl - being named only as Child H – has a neurological disability which can cause challenging behaviour, with the potential to harm herself and others.

Despite being held overnight in cells twice she was never offered the support of an appropriate adult.

Following a complaint by her mother, the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) made a series of recommendations.

The report concluded there had been a “widespread failure by Sussex Police officers to document their use of force in relation to Child H”.

The IPCC described this as a “very worrying failure in that it indicates a lack of appreciation of their own accountability, using force on a person so young and vulnerable is a grave occurrence that should be treated with the significance it merits”.

Seven custody sergeants and two police constables were given management advice while another custody sergeant and an inspector have retired from the force since the incidents in 2012.

The IPCC’s recommendations include improved training on the use of force on children and adults with mental illness, additional training on detaining vulnerable people and ensuring officers are accountable for their use of force.

But Gus Silverman, a civil liberties solicitor at Irwin Mitchell, who is acting for Child H and Ms H thinks it should go further.

He said: “The systemic failings uncovered by the IPCC’s investigation are truly shocking. During this time every Sussex Police custody sergeant and Inspector involved in her care failed to call an appropriate adult, most obviously her mother, to support her.

“My client calls on the Chief Constable of Sussex Police to commission an independent expert in managing challenging behaviour to review the extremely intrusive form of restraints used against Child H by officers in this case.

The most serious offence was common assault on a security guard and criminal damage, relating to a time she ran away from her mother in Horsham town centre and knocked over an A-board, but all charges were dropped by the Crown Prosecution Service.

Temporary Deputy Chief Constable Robin Smith said staff training had been updated.

He added in a statement issued by the force: "The application of any type of restraint is considered only when the level of resistance causes concern for the safety of the detained person, the officer and other members of the public.”

‘SHE NEEDED PATIENCE... INSTEAD SHE WAS LOCKED UP’

THE mother of a disabled girl locked in handcuffs, hoods and leg restraints for minor offences has opened up about her nightmare with Sussex Police.

Ms H, mother of Child H, said: “My daughter’s contact with the police in 2012 was nothing short of a nightmare for both of us.

“At the time her disability meant that she could behave in very challenging ways, but what she needed was patience, respect and the support of her mother.

“Instead she was locked up in a police station without me or anyone else who knew her for support.

“I know that some of the officers were doing their best, but I cannot understand why others thought it was appropriate to put an 11-year-old girl in handcuffs and leg restraints.

“I can’t accept that it will ever by be appropriate for the police to hood a disabled child, regardless of how they behave.

“I call on Sussex Police to stop doing this to children immediately.”

In summary, the IPCC found cases to answer for misconduct in relation to:

  • A 999 call taker for failing to record sufficient information during a call from Child H’s mother, and failing to link the call to Child H’s previous contact with the police
  • Two PCs for inappropriately handcuffing Child H
  • A custody sergeant for failing to carry out an appropriate risk assessment in custody
  • Seven custody sergeants and a police inspector for failing to call an appropriate adult on various occasions
  • One custody sergeant for failing to deal with Child H’s detention expediently.