Firearm officers cleared over boy’s water pistol arrest

The actions of armed police who surrounded and arrested a black 13-year-old boy after an officer mistook his water pistol for a real gun were “reasonable in the circumstances”, the Independent Office For Police Conduct (IOPC) has said.

The child, known as “Child X”, was handcuffed and confronted by marksmen in Hackney, east London, in July last year.

The police watchdog, which launched an investigation following complaints from the boy’s family, said although the incident had been distressing for the boy, the officers’ conduct was “reasonable”.

Campaign group the Alliance for Police Accountability (APA) , which supported the boy’s family, has criticised the watchdog’s decision.

Its chairman, Lee Jasper, said in a statement: “This case exemplifies the failure of both the Metropolitan Police and the IOPC to protect black children and hold officers accountable for the harm they cause.”

The boy’s mother previously said her son had been racially profiled and believed he would not have been arrested if he was white.

The IOPC said a patrolling police officer reported seeing the boy pulling out “what appeared to be a handgun” and pointing it at a female on Buxton Road, before they both cycled off.

After the sighting was declared a firearms incident, a number of armed officers were sent to the scene to locate the boy, the report said.

When they saw him cycling towards them, they made “tactical contact” with him with a police vehicle, knocking him into a wall.

He was then surrounded by officers and arrested, although the toy gun was not found.

When the boy’s mother appeared and explained he had been playing with a toy water pistol, he was de-arrested and his handcuffs removed, the watchdog said.

He later went to hospital to be treated for bruising.

IOPC regional director Charmaine Arbouin said the incident was “distressing” to the child but that the officers were trying to protect the public.

“Police officers have a duty to protect the public from harm and the evidence from our investigation supported the first officer’s belief that he thought he may have seen a real firearm.”