Once again spit hoods are in the news.

This week the Metropolitan Police Force announced that, after a lengthy trial, they would not be using spit hoods in public but that their use would be restricted to custody suites. This decision puts them in conflict with the Home Secretary who entered the debate arguing that there was no reason not to use them.

I have previously written about the debate - click here to read.  

There doesn’t seem to be any easy answer – clearly police officers should not be spat at. As the debate raged on Twitter there was a lot of flak heading in the direction of Liberty who have taken a strong stance on the issue.

The difficulty is that there are cases where the use of spit hoods seems to have prevented proper care from being provided to those being detained. The recent inquest of Terry Smith from Stanwell in Surrey had to examine whether the use of spit hoods was a contributory factor to his death.

Apparently the medical examiner, Dr Ali, did not ask for the spit hood Terry was wearing to be lifted. The inquest heard evidence that spit hoods have the potential to impede breathing.

The decision of the Metropolitan Police is a brave one in the light of the stance of the Home Secretary and the Police Federation. Clearly the Police need protection but not at the risk to life of those who are in their custody.

There needs to be clear and unequivocal guidance as to how and when they should be used and this needs to be based on empirical research as to the risks and weighed against the benefits.