A High Court Judge has ruled that a police watchdog must re-review its decision not to hold a new investigation into the fatal shooting of a man by a Humberside Police officer.
The ruling has been welcomed by the family of Lewis Skelton, who was shot dead by an officer – who has never been publicly named and is known as B50 – in Hull city centre on November 29, 2016.
At an inquest in October 2021, a jury unanimously found that it was more likely than not that Mr Skelton, 31, had been unlawfully killed.
Mr Skelton had been carrying a small axe but had not approached or interacted with members of the public, nor had he threatened anyone.
Mr Skelton had a history of mental health issues. Officers were told he was considered ‘low risk’, yet lethal shots were fired as Mr Skelton was moving in the direction of three workmen, who B50 claimed were in imminent danger.
The officer and his colleague alleged Mr Skelton had been threatening towards the officers, a claim which was not supported by CCTV.
Arrange a call back
Decisions in the original investigation “might have been different”
An original investigation, carried out before the 2021 inquest, concluded there was no indication of any misconduct by officers, and so there was no consideration of disciplinary action or criminal investigation.
After the inquest, Mr Skelton’s family, through their Civil Liberties team at Hudgell Solicitors and Doughty Street Chambers, asked the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) to re-investigate the officer’s actions, which it refused.
In January 2023, the Divisional Court rejected a legal challenge to the Inquest conclusion, which was pursued by the officer and supported by his Chief Constable.
That Judicial Review upheld the inquest jury’s conclusion that there had been sufficient evidence to find the officer had unlawfully killed Mr Skelton.
Having been asked by the family’s solicitors to think again, the IOPC maintained it was not necessary to have any re-investigation which could consider whether or not B50 might have any case to answer for his actions.
The IOPC claimed evidence given by B50 at the Inquest, in which he for the first time accepted ‘quite possibly’ that Mr Skelton was ‘staggering along’ or ‘stumbling along’ when the decision was taken to shoot him, wasn’t significant new information to warrant a new investigation.
This was despite accepting that there had been flaws in the original investigation, which had found that Mr Skelton had been ‘running towards members of the public’ at the time.
The IOPC also concluded that a re-investigation of Mr Skelton’s death was not necessary in the public interest.
Now, a second Judicial Review has seen the police watchdog overruled by High Court judge Mrs Justice Hill.
This followed a further legal application by the family’s legal team in which it was argued that the IOPC had failed to follow procedures correctly in reaching their decision not to re-investigate.
A key question was whether flaws in the original investigation had a material impact on decisions about discipline, performance or potential referral to the CPS.
Mrs Justice Hill said that decisions in the original investigation outcome ‘might have been different’ and that the effect of the flaws in the original investigation
Potentially – the investigator had been working on the basis that Mr Skelton posed a greater threat than was justified: if he was not in fact running, and had not in fact engaged in earlier threatening behaviour, it was reasonable to regard him as of less of a risk than if he had in fact done either of things.
Initial IOPC investigation and latest review both ‘substandard’
Solicitor Neil Hudgell said:
The IOPC can re-investigate when it is satisfied there are ‘compelling reasons’ to do so. The Court found that the police watchdog failed to follow its own policy on that test.
We have always felt the initial investigation fell way below the standards expected as officers’ statements were not challenged sufficiently over the events on the day Lewis lost his life. Officers’ versions of events were accepted which did not stand up against CCTV footage, and other evidence heard at the Inquest.
The latest review in 2022, was similarly substandard. The IOPC must now look again at this case with renewed vigour. They owe that to Lewis’ family, who have been hugely let down by a complete lack of accountability – and continued denial – ever since the day he was shot.
Decisions such as those made by the IOPC in this case go a long way toward eroding any trust in them to conduct fair and fearless investigations, even when contact with the police leads to the most tragic of circumstances. Their role in holding the police to account is at its most important when acting as a critical check on those who use lethal force with the power of the state behind them.”
To this day Humberside Police have fought an expensive and ultimately unsuccessful rearguard action to defend their position, standing behind their officer in his legal challenge and behind the IOPC in this one, in the face of evidence that their officer’s conduct ought to have been subject to a proper investigation from the start.
Seven years on, this family deserves a proper and meaningful apology.
Family fighting on for justice
In a statement, Mr Skelton’s family said:
It is now seven-and-a-half years since Lewis was shot dead, there has still been no acceptance from Humberside Police, the officer, or the IOPC that anything really went wrong that day. All we have faced is constant denial and challenges at every stage and attempts to make us give up and go away. We have called for a proper investigation from the start – a chance for us to see justice for Lewis – and we’ve been ignored.
The inquest jury, who sat and considered all the evidence, witnessed the officers giving evidence and being questioned, and viewed the CCTV footage, and concluded Lewis was unlawfully killed. Yet, what’s happened to the officers involved?
We thank our legal team for continuing to fight for justice for Lewis. It has been hard for us as a family to keep doing this, to keep coming back to Court, but we will always do so to get justice for Lewis, and to ensure other families don’t suffer in the way we have.
