Officer accused of holding boy's throat dismissed
A police officer accused of putting his hands on a 15-year-old boy's throat while arresting him has been dismissed for gross misconduct.
Dorset Police said PC Lorne Castle "failed to act with self-control" during the incident in Bournemouth town centre in January 2024.
The officer admitted misconduct during a hearing at force headquarters in Winfrith, but denied gross misconduct.
During proceedings he apologised and admitted his behaviour was "rude", but said he "panicked in the moment".
The hearing concluded on Thursday and an independent panel said the matter was "so serious the only outcome was dismissal without notice".
The force said PC Castle would be placed on the police barred list, which prevents him from holding any further role within policing.
The hearing heard PC Castle was on duty in uniform when he responded to reports of two separate alleged assaults in the town centre.
Dorset Police said once he was at the scene, the officer found the boy to make an arrest, and body worn video showed him "behaving aggressively and inappropriately from the outset".
A police statement said: "The panel found that PC Castle failed to act with self-control, did not treat the boy with courtesy or respect.
"His shouting, swearing, finger pointing, taking hold of the boy's face and throat and suggested use of leg restraints was not necessary, reasonable or proportionate."
The boy was arrested on suspicion of assault several minutes into the incident and suspicion of possession of a knife.
The force said no further action was taken against the teenager, but he was issued with an out of court disposal for possessing a knife.
PC Castle's conduct was reported to supervisors and after an investigation he was put on restricted non-public facing duties.
Deputy Chief Constable Rachel Farrell described PC Castle's actions as "excessive, aggressive and inappropriate".
She said: "PC Castle has let the police service and his colleagues down and it is important to reiterate that he does not represent the many hard-working officers and staff of Dorset Police."
Ms Farrell said work was continuing within the force to "ensure all officers, staff and volunteers understand the importance of calling out behaviour that falls below the expected standards".
You can follow BBC Dorset on Facebook, X (Twitter), or Instagram.
Police officer jailed over 'chokehold' offence
Police officer reinstated after using racial slur
More than 140 police faced misconduct allegations
Trainee police officer sacked after MOT lies
Dorset Police
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
All the ways Trump and Musk could tear each other apart
The fallout from Elon Musk's bitter public spat with Donald Trump struck an immediate blow, sending shares in the billionaire's company Tesla tumbling. But the damage risks spreading much further as two of the world's most powerful men squabble over policy, politics and personal behaviour. As US president, Mr Trump has the powers of the federal government at his fingertips – giving him a variety of ways to make Mr Musk's life difficult through investigations, regulatory actions and even scrutiny of his immigration status. Yet at the same time, the world's richest man has leverage too: his billions may hold the key to maintaining Republican control of Congress, with crucial midterm elections coming up next year. Both men have fiercely loyal followings, ready to trash their rival's reputation. And both have a burn-it-down mentality that pushes them to keep going until they have won… or lost it all. Here's how the pair could go to war against each other: Mr Musk is already fighting off multiple probes into his business empire. America's stock market regulator, the Securities and Exchange Commission, is investigating whether he violated trading rules when he first began investing in Twitter, now called X. When investors hold 5 per cent or more of a company's stock, they are supposed to declare it publicly. But the SEC accuses Mr Musk of waiting at least 10 days too long, only making a disclosure when he already owned 9.2 per cent of Twitter. He went on to buy the entire business in a $44 billion deal. At the same time, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is investigating accidents involving Tesla cars when their full-self driving mode is activated. Shareholders assumed these probes would be dropped by a Musk-friendly administration. Now they might only be the beginning. Another bombshell investigation by the New York Times claimed Mr Musk, who has publicly admitted taking small doses of ketamine, was given advance notice of drug tests at SpaceX. As a government-contractor, the rocket company is required to maintain a zero-tolerance environment. It wouldn't take much to dig deeper. And did Mr Musk overstep a national security line when he famously tried to get a briefing on US plans for war with China? Both Mr Trump and Mr Musk have their own social media platforms, Truth Social and X (formerly known as Twitter) respectively. But as bully pulpits go, X is by far the bigger beast. While Truth Social reportedly has around six million monthly active users, Twitter boasts more than 600 million. Throughout last year's presidential election campaign, Mr Musk used his platform to boost Mr Trump's chances, amplifying his messages and even hosting a live video interview on X. He may now use these same tactics to attack the president. Critics have also previously accused the businessman of changing X's algorithms to suit his whims, as well as repeating unverified claims that later turn out to be false. This week Mr Musk demonstrated how he can also quickly turn X against his former ally with posts attacking Mr Trump, which appeared prominently on the feeds of many users. In one particular jibe, he reached for what he described as 'the really big bomb'. He wrote: This was a reference to the unproven conspiracy theory that the Trump administration is dragging its feet in releasing all the details of the investigation into the paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, who died in 2019, because of alleged revelations about his links to the president. 'The truth will come out,' Mr Musk added in a follow-up post. His claim has already been viewed by more than 185 million people, according to X. Even if Mr Musk has no evidence to back up his claims, the allegations underscore the power of his platform. The US president has already threatened to use his constitutional power to kneecap Mr Musk's SpaceX programme by cancelling his government contract worth billions of dollars. 'The easiest way to save money in our Budget, Billions and Billions of Dollars, is to terminate Elon's Governmental Subsidies and Contracts. I was always surprised that Biden didn't do it,' the president wrote on Truth Social. SpaceX has secured $16 billion worth of contracts from Nasa alone since 2006, including $5 billion for research and development, according to analysis by research firm Eurospace. Still, Mr Musk holds some cards too. At present, Nasa is completely reliant on SpaceX to send both cargo and astronauts into space – and at one stage on Thursday Mr Musk suggested he could 'decommission' the Dragon craft used by the agency. Although potential alternatives to Dragon exist, SpaceX's Falcon 9 reusable rocket is currently the only booster cleared for sending humans into space in the US. 'The alternative, of course, would be to do what they did before Falcon and Dragon were available – which is to use the systems provided by the Russians,' says Pierre Lionnet, managing director of Eurospace. Because of this, Steve Bannon, a former adviser and long-time ally of Mr Trump, has suggested the president should use the Defense Production Act to nationalise SpaceX, citing national security. Mr Bannon is a longstanding opponent of Mr Musk, and took huge delight in the very public breakdown of his relationship with the president. He also called for the immediate nationalisation of SpaceX and Starlink because of their importance to national security. Tesla, Mr Musk's electric car company, has made substantial amounts of money from government green energy programmes. This includes more than $11 billion it has made selling clean air 'credits' to rival car makers under a carbon emissions scheme, which have accounted for about one third of the company's profits since 2012, according to analysis by Axios. Under Joe Biden, federal grants worth up to $7,500 were also introduced for drivers who buy electric vehicle purchases. Both of these money-spinning schemes are threatened by Mr Trump's tax and spending bill and the president has suggested this is why Mr Musk has turned on him. Mr Trump wrote on Truth Social: 'I took away his EV Mandate that forced everyone to buy Electric Cars that nobody else wanted (that he knew for months I was going to do!), and he just went CRAZY!' Analysts at JPMorgan have suggested Tesla could lose $3.2 billion in profits as a result of Mr Trump's tax and spending bill, which axes the subsidies and targets carbon trading schemes. White House aides at first insisted that the dispute between the two men came down to differences over Mr Trump's flagship piece of legislation, the 'big, beautiful bill', rather than a deeper divide. Mr Musk has claimed the bill will cause the US national debt to balloon, condemning Americans to 'debt slavery'. His public comments have emboldened some Republicans in the House and Senate to also change their minds and voice opposition. The billionaire previously made life difficult for Mike Johnson, the Speaker of the House, in December when he rallied opposition against a bipartisan spending bill to avert a government shutdown. Now, his attacks on Mr Trump's signature policy could create serious headaches. The president and his Republican allies are grappling with wafer-thin majorities in Congress, meaning a careful balance of promises and threats will be needed to keep enough law makers on board. Insiders have also spelt out the bill's importance. If the first 100 days of his presidency was about shock and awe, pushing through hundreds of executive orders, the second 100 days is supposed to be about working the phones and mobilising support in Congress to pass this legislation. Mr Musk's intervention has put the entire project, and a chunk of Mr Trump's tax-cutting legacy, on the brink of collapse. Mr Musk's origin story has a wrinkle. The South African arrived in the US to pursue graduate studies at Stanford University during the 1990s. But he ditched classes and instead used his time to launch the first of his companies, Zip2, which he later sold for $300 million. That put him in breach of his visa and meant that he worked illegally, according to documents and legal experts cited by the Washington Post. His enemies have long used those details to call him an illegal alien. As the row accelerates, Steve Bannon, the former Trump adviser, has reportedly advised Mr Trump to launch a formal investigation into Mr Musk's immigration status – and have him 'deported'. 'I am of the strong belief that Musk is an illegal alien and should be deported from the country immediately,' Mr Bannon told the New York Times. It seems unlikely that Mr Musk will end up on a plane to El Salvador with other illegal immigrants – but the threats are a sign of just how much hostility he now faces within Trumpland. Mr Musk and Mr Trump made for odd ideological bedfellows. Mr Musk, from the tech right, is a libertarian, intent on reducing the federal government to dust … all the better to allow his business empire to thrive. Mr Trump wants to use all the agencies at his disposal to promote the interests of the blue-collar voters who back him and to crush his opponents. Their alliance meant Mr Musk could pump more than $200 million into the 2024 election, helping Mr Trump win battleground states and Republicans to win the Senate and House. 'Without me, Trump would have lost the election,' Mr Musk declared on Thursday. 'Such ingratitude,' he added in a follow-up post. Mr Musk had already signalled he might not have more time or money for politics. And, without his largesse, the rupture with the president could spell doom for Republicans in tight districts. Mr Trump is no stranger to the impeachment process: in fact he is the only president to be impeached twice, both of the trials occurring in his first term. On both occasions he was saved by a Republican firewall in the Senate, with members of his own party circling the waggons to protect him, paving the way for his political comeback and election win last year. On Thursday, their relationship breaking down while the world watched on in real time, Mr Musk suggested the president should be impeached, convicted and replaced with JD Vance, the vice-president. So far, that looks unlikely: Republicans control both chambers of Congress, and it's unlikely the Tesla billionaire has enough support among senators to reach the two-thirds threshold to boot him out of office. But it's a damaging intervention, nonetheless, because Mr Musk has declared his former ally unfit for office. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Yahoo
39 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Jake Paul Blames Republican Party For Donald Trump & Elon Musk Drama 'They're 50+ Years Old And Diss Tweeting Each Other'
Jake Paul is not holding back when it comes to his thoughts on the Republican Party, taking aim at what he calls its deeper problems as the Donald Trump and Elon Musk feud plays out in public. His latest comments mark a sharp contrast to last year, when Paul came to Trump's defense after a controversial Puerto Rico joke at a Madison Square Garden rally sparked backlash. The current tension sparked when Elon Musk left Donald Trump's administration and criticized the president's "One Big Beautiful Bill." Paul weighed in on the public fallout between Donald Trump and Elon Musk, calling the feud a clear sign of what is wrong with the Republican Party. The influencer addressed the situation on X (formerly Twitter) on Thursday, offering a rare political take. Though he identified himself as a current Republican, Paul criticized the party's leadership style, writing, "We unfortunately have these Alpha male egos and leaders who aren't mature enough sometimes." "They're 50+ years old and diss tweeting each other," Paul added, referencing the back-and-forth between Trump and Musk that has grabbed headlines. In his tweet, he added that while both men are "great," their inability to work together only hurts the country's image. "They need to work together and not make America look bad," he concluded. The fight between the high-profile men took a serious turn on Thursday after Musk publicly accused Trump of being the reason the Epstein files remain largely sealed. As reported by The Blast, Musk dropped the claim on X, alleging that Trump's name appears in the unreleased documents tied to Jeffrey Epstein, the late financier at the center of a massive sex trafficking case involving powerful figures around the world. "Time to drop the really big bomb: @realDonaldTrump is in the Epstein files. That is the real reason they have not been made public. Have a nice day, DJT!" Musk tweeted. The entrepreneur followed up with a second post predicting that his claim would be confirmed in time. "Mark this post for the future. The truth will come out," he added. Trump admitted his relationship with Musk may be beyond repair following the tech mogul's harsh criticism of the administration's massive spending bill. The Blast reported that during a press conference from the Oval Office on June 5, Trump was asked about Musk's comments and did not hold back. "Elon and I had a great relationship. I don't know if we will anymore," he said, making it clear the rift is not on his side. Trump expressed disappointment in Musk, accusing him of flipping on the bill only when it threatened billions in electric vehicle mandates. "He only developed the problem when he found out that we're going to have to cut the [electric vehicle] mandate because that's billions and billions of dollars," Trump noted, hinting that the billionaire's change of heart was more about personal interests than principle. Before their feud exploded online, Musk had already taken a quiet jab at the president's massive spending plan during a May interview on CBS Sunday Morning. In the sit-down, Musk, who previously led the Department of Government Efficiency, criticized the bill for inflating the deficit and undoing efforts to streamline federal spending. Musk did not stop there. He emphatically stated, "I think a bill can be big or it can be beautiful. But I don't know if it can be both. My personal opinion." The legislation in question builds on Trump's 2017 tax cuts and includes increased border security funding, new Medicaid work requirements, and a rollback of clean energy tax credits. Experts say the package would add $3.8 trillion to the national deficit over the next decade. Paul's recent takedown of the Republican Party is a far cry from his public defense of Trump just last year. The boxer had rushed to Trump's side in 2024 when backlash erupted over a controversial joke about Puerto Rico made by comedian Tony Hinchcliffe at a Trump rally in Madison Square Garden, per The Blast. Paul criticized the joke in a video but made it clear Trump was not to blame. "I'll start off with something that bothered me recently was Tony Hinchcliffe, a comedian who made a bad joke," the YouTuber said. While he did not excuse the offensive remarks, Paul defended the president by drawing a clear line between Trump's stance and the comedian's words. In his own words, "I want to shine a light on the fact these aren't Donald Trump views." With his blunt message, Jake Paul made it clear he is more focused on progress than party loyalty or drama.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
There's Only One Question Here: Can Musk Bring Trump Down if He Wants?
For starters, I say Donald Trump is due our congratulations and respect. He finally found a white Afrikaner he'd like to throw out of the country. The early conventional wisdom on the Trump-Elon Musk divorce is that it was simultaneously shocking and inevitable. I suppose it was both of those things—Musk's fusillade of tweets Thursday was pretty shocking, especially the Jeffrey Epstein bomb; and it's true that this was bound to happen one day—no friendship between a ketamine-torqued egomaniac and a sociopathic liar with the emotional architecture of a 5-year-old is destined to go the distance. Taking a somewhat more historical perspective, this is the feud that Milton Friedman's America deserves. We've now lived through decades in which vast fortunes were amassed and lionized—and, importantly, at least in Trump's case, inherited and far too lightly taxed. Fred Trump gave Donald a reported $400 million when he died in 1999. Errol Musk was an emerald-mine magnate who once bragged that he had 'so much money we couldn't even close our safe,' though the extent to which he supported his son is a matter of heated debate (between them, mostly). Whatever the truth is there, the bottom line is that here we are, stuck with a crooked and stupid billionaire president and a crazed narcissist who could buy several countries fighting over which one has the purer, more Friedmansque-reactionary vision for what the United States should become. That's a crucial matter to which we'll return, but before we do that, let's indulge in the fun stuff and just cut to the chase: Does Musk have the goods to bring Trump down if he wants to? You should listen to my colleague Greg Sargent's interview with Rick Wilson on his podcast today (transcript here, if you prefer). Wilson is entertaining, as usual, but what's interesting is how his view of this goes against the conventional-wisdom grain. The emerging consensus is that Trump holds more cards here than Musk. He's the president, after all, and more than that, he is, as we know all too well, a president who's willing and eager to use the machinery of the state to settle personal scores. By this argument, Musk is in for weeks or months of hell if he doesn't take steps to tone this down. But to Wilson, 'Elon has more weapons here than Trump does.' Prominent among those, obviously, is Twitter. We all know what Musk has done with Twitter since buying it: He's reset the algorithms to elevate all manner of right-wing sewage—and to promote Donald Trump. What if Musk decides to reverse that? Most of the pro-Trump chatter on Twitter and other social media isn't coming from actual human beings. Most of it is coming from pro-Trump 'bot farms' that take over accounts or create fake ones for some specific purpose. Some estimates are that 73 percent of all internet traffic is bot-farm-initiated. (And isn't it lovely that up to three-quarters of what appears to be public opinion is totally faked by cynical and malicious people, if indeed it's even people behind it anymore?) Musk, Wilson told Sargent, could turn off the Trump bots in about three clicks. Doing that 'would change the political climate in this country almost instantaneously,' Wilson said. 'He could turn Twitter into a machine right now that will bash the tax bill.' Does that assign Twitter too much power? Could be. But if Twitter turns on Trump and the bill, the political world will notice. The dug-in MAGAs won't listen. But some of the non-MAGA people currently still saying they approve of Trump's job performance just might. Trump is still, astonishingly to me, polling in the mid-40s. If he drops down to 40, we're in a different political situation. Then there's the campaign. When Musk charges that Trump never would have won without his $290 million … well, that could be just a Johnson-measuring contest, in which case, who cares. But it's possible Musk knows something about how some of that money was spent. I mean, if I gave somebody $290 million for an important purpose, I'd want to know how it was spent. Maybe it was just spent on those anti-trans ads. But let's put it this way: We know Trump cheated in 2016. We know he's cheated all his life at everything. So he got a massive $290 million infusion in 2020 and thought, 'Let's be sure to spend every penny toward legitimate ends!' Seems unlikely. Finally, there's the nuclear bomb. Let's refresh our memories on the specific allegation against Trump with regard to Jeffrey Epstein. The week before the 2016 election, a woman who alleged that Trump raped her when she was 13 was about to hold a press conference and go public. She charged that Trump assaulted her four different times at parties thrown by Epstein. The media didn't take her allegations seriously at first because the woman allied herself with 'an eccentric anti-Trump campaigner with a record of making outlandish claims about celebrities,' as The Guardian put it. Then she hired lawyer Lisa Bloom—who had successfully sued the Boy Scouts, among others—and who is the daughter of Gloria Allred, who represented female accusers of Trump and Bill Cosby. The case was taken more seriously. The woman was ready to go public five days before the election, but she backed down after receiving many death threats. Trump, of course, denied the allegations. Does Musk know of actual evidence? He's not the world's most stable person either, so it's entirely possible that he's blowing smoke. Epstein once told Michael Wolff, 'I was Donald's closest friend for 10 years.' And Trump told New York magazine in 2002 that 'I've known Jeff for 15 years. Terrific guy. He's a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side.' We presume innocence in the United States, especially on so touchy a matter as this. But presuming innocence doesn't prevent us from wondering whether Musk is just trying to cause Trump maximum pain—or if he actually knows something. There were signs Friday morning that the feud was being turned down a notch or two. The White House was desperate for a meeting with Musk to cool the temperature—interesting in itself that it wasn't the other way around. So maybe Musk won't follow through on Thursday's threats. And who knows, with people this unstable, they could easily be BFFs again in six months. But any eulogy for this relationship must first and foremost be a eulogy for the United States of America. An amoral billionaire who by rights should have been impeached and barred from running for office for life became president again—legitimately this time, as far as we know—put the world's richest multibillionaire in charge of a sensitive task that he oversaw with the delicacy of a hyena stripping a wildebeest carcass clean. Their efforts have already resulted in deaths around the globe and will cause untold harm in this country over time. And now they're engaged in a 'substantive' argument that can be summarized like this. One, Trump wants a bill that is the usual Republican recipe for fiscal disaster—massive tax cuts for the rich, cuts to programs that helping working and poor people, huge deficits and debts as far as the eye can see. The other, Musk, at least professes to care about the deficits and debt, but he's totally chill with the massive tax cuts for the rich. He's just against the 'pork,' which is rich-man speak for things that might actually benefit people and communities. It's tragic that working Americans are held hostage to this madness. The small silver lining is the hope that Musk can make Trump's life as miserable as Trump can make his.
