This is the horrifying moment officers threw a vulnerable man around ‘like a rag doll’ while restraining him on a hospital floor.
Twenty-four-year-old Brian Ringrose died just days later.
An inquest jury has now concluded that the young father was unlawfully killed by way of manslaughter by former Thames Valley officer PC Martyn Jones.
The distressing footage shows the officer – who was dismissed for gross misconduct following the incident in 2021 – using excessive force while restraining the man at the emergency department of Milton Keynes University Hospital (MKUH).
The jury concluded that ‘neglect’ by the other restraining officers and healthcare staff who did not intervene also contributed to his death.
Following an Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) investigation, PC Jones was dismissed last year, but he has never been prosecuted.
Another officer, PC Daniel Simson, was disciplined.
Brian was still suffering from an overdose of an unknown quantity of his prescribed medications at the time the restraint was carried out.
A man, 24, died after officers treated him like a ‘rag doll’, restraining him on a hospital floor
Twenty-four-year-old Brian Ringrose (pictured) died just days after the incident
The young father had his arms forcibly yanked behind him as he was pinned to the floor
An inquest jury has now concluded that the young father was unlawfully killed by way of manslaughter by former Thames Valley officer PC Martyn Jones.
After the inquest, Brian’s heartbroken mother Mary said her son – an only child – was treated ‘like a rag doll’.
The 24-year-old had struggled with mental health issues following a car accident when he was a teen and was in and out of hospital.
He had three children, and had another on the way at the time.
Speaking to Channel 4 News, Mary said: ‘He shouldn’t have been treated that way.
‘They treated him like a rag doll.
‘They’re there to protect and serve, not kill.’
Thames Valley Police have apologised to Brian’s family for the ‘tragic outcome’.
Nursing staff and health care assistants in the department were also found to have been making ‘inappropriate gestures and comments regarding Brian’ when they ‘should have been monitoring his welfare’.
At one point during the restraint, a nurse can be heard saying: ‘It’s what you do with a three-year-old toddler ain’t it?’
The 24-year-old had struggled with mental health issues following a car accident when he was a teen and was in and out of hospital. He is seen being restrained on the floor
Hospital staff watched on as police pinned the distressed father-of-three to the floor
The inquest opened on February 12, 2021 and an inquest hearing was heard from March 17, 2025 to April 24, 2025.
The jury at Milton Keynes Coroners Court concluded: ‘Brian Ringrose’s death was a result of unlawful killing.
‘Unlawful act manslaughter on the part of a police officer, contributed to by neglect on the part of the restraining police officers and the two officers initially attending in the van and the healthcare staff.’
The incident took place on January 27, 2021, and he died six days later on February 2, 2021, after being put into an induced coma.
It all began when, at around 9am on January 27, 2021, police were called to a domestic incident involving Brian and his partner at a Travelodge.
He was placed under arrest, but was showing symptoms of overdose including ‘alternating between reduced consciousness and intermittent agitation’, having taken an overdose of his prescribed medications just before police were called.
This was observed by arresting officers, and paramedics were called. While waiting, Brian had ‘stumbled on the stairs and hit his head’.
Brian died days after his encounter with police, an inquest heard
Paramedics attended and handed Brian over to the care of the emergency department at MKUH.
Here, due to hospital staff being unaware of the quantity of Brian’s overdose, the Emergency Department (ED) doctor noted that he should remain there for six to 12 hours – however the doctor failed to record this time period in the plan.
Neither the ‘Nurse in Charge’ nor the ‘ED doctor’ were said to have understood Brian to have been medically discharged, yet neither intervened when officers restrained Brian or checked on his welfare.
The jury found the ‘process of confirming discharge from the ED into police custody was inadequate, unsafe, and inappropriate’ and that healthcare staff thought his discharge was ‘premature’ but did not voice their concerns.
When officers attended ED to restrain Brian, he could not even put his own shoes on.
Officers began carrying out the restraint at 3.25pm.
The jury found that ‘after an initial lawful handcuffing and application of leg restraints, the restraint became unnecessary, unreasonable, and disproportionate at approximately 3.31pm when Brian was dragged by his arms and continued to be held in a ground pin position’.
‘Elevating Brian’s arms to an extreme position was also unreasonable, as Brian ought to have had his arms placed in the small of his back, and he should have ceased to be held in a ground pin position, in accordance with Police training.
‘Following a request from hospital staff to move Brian away from a bay, the officer at Brian’s head end dragged Brian by his arms across the floor without informing the officer at the leg end, or Brian, that he was doing so, causing Brian significant pain.
‘There was a brief period after this where the officer at Brian’s head paused the elevation of Brian’s arms to change his own gloves. During this period Brian was on his side/back and ceased to struggle.
An inquest jury concluded that ‘neglect’ by the other restraining officers and healthcare staff who did not intervene also contributed to his death
‘His breathing became less restricted. This would have been an opportunity for the officers initially restraining Brian to apply the Police National Decision Making model and reassess their actions, however they failed to do so.
‘These initial actions and inactions of the police officers initially restraining Brian probably contributed to Brian’s death and influenced the future direction of the restraint.’
The video shows how Brian’s arms were pulled back at times to extreme positions of ‘between 90-180 degrees’.
The jury found: ‘The police officers initially restraining Brian did not listen to, interpret, or react to Brian’s breathing appropriately given the close proximity of the officer at the head end to Brian.
‘Instead they attributed this to purposeful actions and behaviours. Police training includes that officers should treat the symptoms in front of them, not the cause.
‘The hospital staff observing Brian’s restraint did not listen to, interpret, or react to Brian’s breathing appropriately even accounting for the background noise of the environment.
‘Instead, hospital staff made inappropriate comments and drew incorrect conclusions rather than treating Brian’s symptoms.
‘The severe failure of the officers initially restraining Brian in respect of the period of prolonged restraint and struggle in a prone position with his arms in an abnormal position after the initial six and a half minutes, probably caused Brian’s death.’
After Brian was restrained, he was taken to a police van to take him to police custody, but open noticing his abnormal breathing, the van was stopped on its journey, with CPR performed on him before being admitted back at the hospital to intensive care.
After the inquest, Brian’s heartbroken mother Mary said her son – an only child – was treated ‘like a rag doll’.
It was heard during the inquest that the ‘actions and inactions’ of the two officers initially attending in the van ‘did probably contribute to Brian’s death’.
By the time Brian was placed in the police van, at 15.53pm, the jury found that his ‘life probably could not be saved’. By this time, his condition is said to have severely worsened, his breathing sounds had ‘become agonal’, and he became ‘very still, limp, and floppy’.
The jury said that by this time he had become ‘deathly pale’, but none of the officers or medical staff noticed this.
Police and Crime Commissioner for Thames Valley, Matthew Barber has said following the inquest: ‘My thoughts remain with the family and friends of Mr Ringrose following his tragic death and in their quest for answers after a long and difficult process.
‘As a community it is right that we entrust our police officers to use force appropriately in order to protect us all. The robust training that the Thames Valley Police has in place is important to reassure us all that any use of force in policing should always be proportionate, lawful, appropriate and necessary.
Brian is seen surrounded by medical staff as police sought to restrain him on the hospital floor
‘The verdict concluded that Mr Ringrose’s death was a result of unlawful killing (unlawful act manslaughter) by a former Thames Valley Police officer, in contravention of Thames Valley Police’s policies, procedures and training.
‘Recommendations from the IOPC investigation regarding those have already been put in place.
‘The Force have rightly apologised to the family of Mr Ringrose for the tragic outcome.
‘I am assured through continued liaison with the Chief Constable that Thames Valley Police trains its officers on the use of force to the highest standard to ensure officers are equipped to protect the public and themselves as they maintain order and uphold the law.
‘I await the report from the Coroner following this inquest to understand any further learning for Thames Valley Police and will continue to hold the Chief Constable to account to ensure that any recommendations are implemented in full.’
