THE family of Sheku Bayoh, the Fife father-of-two who died in police custody, have told Scotland’s top law officer that they have lost confidence in the Police Investigations and Review Commissioner (PIRC) carrying out the investigation into his death.
However, in a statement following a meeting with Lord Advocate Frank Mulholland, they said they believed he was determined to uphold an earlier promise to ensure a “robust, independent and transparent inquiry”.
Family lawyer Aamer Anwar said they did not believe the PIRC had shown the necessary expertise to deal with the investigation, and had grave reservations about its impartiality.
They believed the PIRC had “failed to use their powers to hold police officers to account”.
Anwar said: “Many of the concerns raised today were addressed by the Lord Advocate, whilst other matters will form the basis of further inquiries.
“The Bayoh family have stated from day one that Sheku acted out of character and that if he broke the law then the police had a right to act, but he did not deserve to die.
“The Bayoh family instructed some of the country’s leading pathologists and a legal team for a reason, to ensure that they are not taken for fools and patronised.”
Anwar added that the family’s legal team had uncovered “matters of serious concern”, which had been referred to Chief Constable Sir Stephen House for investigation.
“The Bayoh family now have a pretty accurate account of what happened, but chose not to release a great deal of information into the public domain so as not to prejudice any potential criminal proceedings but also because of their faith in the Lord
Advocate’s team,” said Anwar. “The question asked of the Lord Advocate today was, if the restraint of Sheku Bayoh had been done by six civilians, would they have been allowed to walk the streets?
“Would his death have been treated as a crime? And would the civilians responsible for the restraint been treated as suspects rather than as witnesses?
“The Bayoh family expect the Lord Advocate to leave no stone unturned in the search for the truth. They retain faith in his ability to do so, but that faith is not blind.”
The solicitor said what was known was that Bayoh weighed 12 stones 10lbs, was 5ft 10ins tall, but was brought to the ground within a minute of the first police contact in a Kirkcaldy street in May.
He did not get up again. Six police officers were involved in his restraint using handcuffs, leg and ankle restraints, and a minute later he stopped breathing. Ninety minutes later he was pronounced dead.
Anwar said the family had tried to keep an open mind, but now believed those investigating the death had not. “There has been much speculation about the cause of death, which is still to be determined,” he added.
“Relevant CCTV footage has been secured, including mobile phone footage from civilians. The family has requested the Lord Advocate release the CCTV footage of Sheku’s final moments to stop the poisonous and systematic leaking of material to the media by police sources.”
Colette Bell, Bayoh’s partner, said: “I believe that if the police hadn’t treated my Sheku the way they did, he would be here today. I am fed up of the lies and the attempt to blame Sheku for his own death.”
A Crown Office spokesman said: “There remains work to be done by PIRC before their investigation is complete. The Crown will take the PIRC report into account when carrying out its own investigations and will assess whether or not there should be a criminal prosecution.
“In order for any criminal prosecution to happen, there must be sufficient evidence in law that a crime has been committed.
“The family have been advised, by the Lord Advocate, that as part of the ongoing investigation there are a number of complex issues relating to the cause of death and experts in the field have been instructed to assist in dealing with these issues.
“The Lord Advocate has reiterated the undertaking previously given to the family that the enquiry will be thorough and completed as soon as is possible.”
The PIRC said: “The Commissioner continues to work closely with the Lord Advocate to investigate complex lines of enquiry, including gathering further expert opinion in relation to the cause of death.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here