Fury as award-winning police officer is sacked after showing knife-carrying teen who 'assaulted elderly man' a 'lack of courtesy and respect' as he arrested him
An award-winning police officer has been fired after he was accused of showing a lack of courtesy and respect to a knife-carrying teenager he arrested for assault.
The decision to dismiss PC Lorne Castle has prompted fury after he was found to have committed gross misconduct - with critics calling it 'bloody madness' and 'perverse'.
The officer swore at and threatened the 15-year-old suspect as he arrested him for allegedly assaulting two people, one of whom was an elderly man.
PC Castle, 46, pinned the youth up against a wall before taking him to the ground - both techniques which were later deemed lawful.
The boy, known as Witness A, screamed in the officer's face and resisted arrest while on the floor.
The officer of nine years then called him a 'b***h' and threatened to 'smash him in' while straddling him - and at one stage he placed his hand on the boy's face and jabbed his finger at him, a disciplinary panel heard.
During the commotion a Stanley-type knife fell out of the teenager's waistband.
But the panel has now ruled PC Castle made the boy feel 'frightened and intimidated' and showed him a 'lack of courtesy and respect' during the arrest in Bournemouth in January last year.
Pc Castle (right) won an award for saving a person from drowning, as well as previously being named Neighbourhood Police Officer of the Year
Senior officers later reviewed the bodycam footage and placed PC Castle under investigation which took 16 months.
The officer admitted that he 'lost control' during the arrest and tearfully apologised for his 'out of character' actions at a police disciplinary hearing.
But the panel, led by Dorset Police Assistant Chief Constable Deborah Smith, found him guilty of gross misconduct.
They said he failed to act with self-control, did not treat the boy with courtesy or respect and that his 'shouting, swearing, finger pointing, taking hold of the boy's face suggested use of leg restraints was not necessary, reasonable or proportionate'.
It was alleged the officer also grabbed the boy's throat but this was not proven.
PC Castle was dismissed without notice and barred from serving again - in a verdict that has now fuelled fury.
Norman Brennan, a retired police officer and founder of the campaign group Protect the Protectors, accused Dorset Police of throwing PC Castle 'under a bus'.
He said: 'Senior officers at Dorset Police have taken leave of their senses.. This decision epitomises how they have lost touch with the danger and reality of frontline policing. It is bloody madness.
'Police officers when facing volatile or violent situations will at times swear and use some unsavoury words.
'All arrests involve some form of force and pushing someone even in the face during a struggle is not always intentional and even if it is its part and parcel in many arrests when restraining a suspect. No arrest is without some sort of force.
'I'm sick and tired of officers being disciplined for things like this and I think the majority of the public would think this is absolutely bonkers.
'Many senior officers kowtow to the constant criticism of the police in a sort of appeasement and often throw officers under the bus or to the wolves as sacrificial lambs. Cases like this are more likely to deter people from joining the police.
'Thousands of officers have and are already throwing the towel in as they have lost faith and confidence in their leadership who in turn are detached from the dangers and stresses of front line policing in Britain in this very violent age that we live in.'
The incident that led to PC Castle's sacking happened in Bournemouth town centre at 5.30pm on January 27 last year.
The boy was suspected of assaulting an elderly man while riding an e-scooter and then getting embroiled in a fracas with another youth outside McDonalds - while ge was also alleged to have run away from town rangers who tried to apprehend him until police arrived.
PC Castle, who has twice won a national bravery award including one for saving an elderly woman from drowning in a swollen river in 2023, spotted the suspect walking up Richmond Hill in Bournemouth.
Bodycam footage showed PC Castle run up to the suspect and push him against the wall before bundling him to the ground and sitting on top of him.
He told the youth to 'show me your f*****g hands' and then put his hands and finger in the teen's face - and when the boy was unable to move his arms, PC Castle told him to 'stop screaming like a little b***h'.
Neither the boy or his family complained about the arrest but PC Castle's colleagues reported concerns about his conduct to senior officers.
Giving evidence, PC Castle said he became 'overwhelmed and scared' when the boy resisted as his mind flashed back to his arrest of a county lines drug dealer 18 months earlier which led him fearing for his life.
As the officer struggled with the dealer, his associate who was stood behind was being told to 'cut him' - before an off-duty officer intervened to defend him.
PC Castle admitted he had overstepped the mark with his language and aggression and broke down in tears as he said: 'I'm embarrassed by the video and I apologise for my actions.
'Anyone who knows me in public or private life knows that is not how I behave. When he started screaming and resisting I panicked and became overwhelmed.
'I did not choke the suspect and I did not get him in a headlock. I was trying to keep his head still with the palm of my hand so he did not hit his head.
'I did not put my full weight on him as my knees were on the concrete. I only applied enough weight to keep his body still.
'During the arrest I saw the knife fall out of his waistband so he was arrested for a knife offence. I think the arrest needed to be made but I lost control of the situation.'
Mark Ley Morgan, representing Dorset Police at the hearing, said the knife was not relevant as PC Castle did not know the boy had it when making the arrest.
Mr Morgan said: 'PC Castle breached standards of professional behaviour by failing to act with self control and failing to treat him with courtesy or respect.
'He abused his power and authority and his behaviour undermined confidence in the police.
'It was totally unnecessary and disproportionate, and it is so serious that dismissal would be justified.'
After the hearing, Dorset Police Deputy Chief Constable Rachel Farrell acknowledged that officers did a 'tough job' but said PC Castle let the force down by his actions.
She said: 'I have never been in any doubt that PC Castle's actions were excessive, aggressive and inappropriate and I can understand the communities we serve will be concerned about this case.
'PC Castle has let the police service and his colleagues down and he does not represent the many hard-working officers and staff of Dorset Police.
'The outcome reflects the seriousness of this matter and ensures that he will no longer hold a role in policing and the privilege of constable.
'I am grateful to the officers for having the courage to do the right thing and report their concerns about PC Castle's actions.'
But campaigner Mr Brennan called the officer's punishment disproportionate, adding: 'I am astounded that the matter reached a formal disciplinary hearing.
'A senior officer should have pulled him aside and given him words of advice about how the public may perceive officers when arresting somebody before letting him go back on the streets.'
PC Castle worked as a community patrol officer in Bournemouth before he joined Dorset Police in about 2016.
He was once named community officer of the year and last year was awarded a Royal Humane Society's testimonial on parchment for saving the woman in the River Avon at Christchurch.
The citation stated how he entered the fast-flowing water and used a rope and life ring and managed to get it close enough to the woman to grab it, saying: 'The brave actions of the officers undoubtedly saved her life.'
Outside of policing he has run a successful boxing training academy with his wife of 24 years, Denise Castle.
Following the panel's verdict, Mr Castle said he was still processing the outcome of the case - while also thanking members of the public who backed him him.
He said: 'I have had an unbelievable amount of public support, from people I know and don't know, which has really kept me going.
'All I will ever do is to try my best. I'm going to think about it (the outcome) and process it a little longer.
'I can't say how much the messages and public support has meant to me because it has been a tough time which has been hard on me and my family.'
Social media users have been among those expressing backing for him - while raising concerns that the outcome could embolden other youngsters with weapons.
Sara Louise posted on social media: 'What message does this send out to all the youngsters who do already or will now carry knives?
'They know they are untouchable if an officer challenges them. What message does this send out to any officer faced in a similar situation. Is it worth the challenge?
'Welcome to Dorset - a county where you can carry a knife but if an officer points their finger at you or calls you a nasty name they will lose their job/career. I'm appalled.'
Jo Holland wrote: 'So a thug carrying a knife has been made into a victim and the officer protecting the public has been made into a criminal. And we wonder why society is going the way it is. Disgraceful decision.'
Ray Venner posted: 'This is a good honourable officer doing a fantastic job in a very difficult dangerous environment. Shameful, absolutely shameful.'
Fiona Lawrence posted: 'Surely dismissing someone with such a good previous record and has saved lives on numerous occasions isn't the correct judgement.'
Other comments have included 'Travesty', 'He should be given a medal not the boot.''No wonder no one wants a career in the police - let's protect the villains'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Rhyl Journal
28 minutes ago
- Rhyl Journal
Welsh railways to get £445m investment in spending review
Rachel Reeves is expected to announce the additional funding as part of her spending review, aiming to address what the Treasury sees as years of underinvestment in Welsh infrastructure. Understood to be a combination of direct funding and additional money for the Welsh government, the investment is expected to be spent on projects such as fixing level crossings, building new stations and upgrading railway lines. A Treasury source said: 'With this Government, Wales will thrive, and the Chancellor has prioritised bringing forward a package that has the potential to be truly transformative.' On Tuesday, Welsh First Minister Eluned Morgan told members of the Senedd that her government was 'expecting something positive from the spending review'. She said: 'I've been clear and I've been consistent when it comes to rail funding that we have not been getting our fair share of funding, in a position that the Tories left us with for over a decade. 'The difference between the Tories and the UK Labour Government is that they've recognised that injustice.' Baroness Morgan's comments came in response to criticism from Plaid Cymru leader Rhun ap Iorwerth of a decision to classify the £6.6 billion Oxford-to-Cambridge line as an England and Wales project. The designation means Wales will not receive the additional rail funding it would get if branded an England-only project. Mr ap Iorwerth said Wales had been 'getting our share until Labour actively moved the goalposts'. The expected announcement of additional funding for Welsh railways is one of several transport-related investments set to be confirmed on Wednesday. Ms Reeves has already announced plans to spend a total of £15.6 billion on public transport projects in England's city regions, and is understood to be preparing to extend the £3 cap on bus fares in England until March 2027.
Telegraph
32 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Royal College of Pathologists comes out against assisted dying
The Royal College of Pathologists, which represents medical examiners, has come out against assisted dying. It said it could not support Kim Leadbeater 's Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill because of the role that it was expected to play in the assisted dying process. Under the Bill, assisted deaths will not be automatically referred to a coroner, which is usual practice for potentially unnatural deaths and when a drug, authorised or otherwise, brings about death. This will mean that it is for medical examiners to scrutinise assisted deaths. The professional body that represents them says that they are not qualified to do so and warn that a lack of resourcing means that medical examiners may be pulled away from other parts of their vital work. Ms Leadbeater on Tuesday defended not involving coroners in the process. She said there was 'no justification for putting the family and loved ones of the deceased through an unnecessary and potentially traumatic coroner's inquiry' because adequate safeguards were in place. It comes as the Bill returns to the Commons for a debate on Friday, and a vote on the legislation is expected next week. Dr Suzy Lishman, senior adviser on medical examiners for the Royal College of Pathologists, said that the college had no position on the 'ethical issues' of legalising assisted dying. In a statement, Dr Lishman said: 'The college's concerns relate only to the involvement of medical examiners after an assisted death has taken place. 'As part of their scrutiny, medical examiners would need to review the process leading up to the decision to authorise an assisted death and the circumstances of the assisted death, which they are not qualified to do. 'Notification to the coroner following an assisted death would ensure independent judicial review, which is particularly important given the concerns raised by many individuals, organisations and medical royal colleges about the lack of adequate safeguards in the Bill for vulnerable people. 'Lawyers, not doctors, are the most appropriate professionals to review these deaths. The medical examiner system was implemented to detect problems with medical care, not to identify discrepancies or malintent in the legal process required for assisted deaths.' Dr Lishman also raised concerns about the need of 'significant' training and resources needed for medical examiners to be able to perform the role in the process. She said that this would risk 'potentially taking medical examiners away from their current important role'. The Royal College of Pathologists concluded: 'Coronial referral for assisted deaths would be in line with current regulations, with all deaths due to a medical intervention or medicinal product being notified.' Last year, Thomas Teague KC, the former chief coroner for England and Wales from 2020-24, expressed concern about the lack of coroner involvement in the Bill. In a letter to The Telegraph, he wrote: 'Since the coroner's jurisdiction affords a powerful deterrent against misfeasance, the public may wonder why the Bill proposes to abandon such a robust safeguard.' A letter signed by around 1,000 doctors from across the NHS published this week said that the Bill is a 'real threat to both patients and the medical workforce'. They said: 'We are concerned that the private member's Bill process has not facilitated a balanced approach to the collection of evidence and input from key stakeholders including doctors, people with disabilities and other marginalised groups.' The Royal College of Pathologists is the latest royal college to come out against the legislation, after the Royal College of Psychiatrists voiced their opposition to the Bill last month. Ms Leadbeater said: 'The Bill does not prevent any assisted death being referred to a coroner, however this would not be required in the majority of cases. 'Coroners investigate deaths that have been reported to them if they think that the death was violent or unnatural, the cause of death is unknown, or the person died in prison or in custody. None of these would apply to a legal, assisted death under the terms of this Bill. 'Eligibility for an assisted death would have been assessed in advance by two independent doctors and a multi-disciplinary panel overseen by a commissioner who would be a High Court judge or retired judge. 'Each of these assessments would be subject to the extensive safeguards contained in the Bill to protect everybody, including the most vulnerable. 'Consequently, most cases would not require a judicial investigation after a person has died, and there would be no justification for putting the family and loved ones of the deceased through an unnecessary and potentially traumatic coroner's inquiry. 'However, in the event of any doubt at all, it would be open to a medical examiner, a family member or anybody with concerns to ask a coroner to investigate.'
The Sun
33 minutes ago
- The Sun
Ed Miliband accused of ‘rewriting history' after claiming winter fuel axe was to stop millionaires cashing in
ED Miliband was accused of 'rewriting history' yesterday after he claimed scrapping winter fuel was about stopping millionaires getting payments. The bungling Net Zero Secretary tried to justify Labour's original decision to strip the handout by suggesting the pensioners who would've missed out were all rich. 2 2 But some of them earned as little as £12,000 per year. Mr Miliband said: 'The principal question was, the richest in our society, should they get the winter fuel payment, should millionaires, should the richest get the winter fuel payment? 'I think the answer for most people to that is no.' The Net Zero Secretary's desperate bid to explain scrapping winter fuel payments – before the decision was partially reversed – was blasted by senior Tories, who accused him of spouting a 'pack of lies'. Shadow Energy Secretary Andrew Bowie told The Sun: 'Red Ed is even more out of touch than we thought if he thinks people will believe this pack of lies. 'The economy is worse off than when they found it - taxes higher, unemployment higher and living standards lower. 'He is just trying to rewrite history to try and cover up Labour's embarrassing U-turn.' Meanwhile, a flagship Net Zero plan has been spared ahead of next week's spending review — to opponents' dismay. Energy Secretary Ed Miliband has ensured his £13billion warm homes scheme will not be downgraded after negotiations with the Treasury. Chancellor Rachel Reeves decided not to cut the cash which allows heating upgrades through better insulation, solar panels and heat pumps.
