North Wales Police Officer Faces Misconduct Hearing Over Repeated Punches and Headlock During 2023 Arrest

A police officer who struck an arrested man nine times in the head while holding him in a neck restraint used excessive and unjustified force across multiple stages of the encounter, a disciplinary panel has heard. PC Richard Williams of North Wales Police is appearing before a formal misconduct hearing to address allegations arising from the May 2023 arrest of Steven Clark in Gwynedd.

The proceedings, convened at the North Wales Police headquarters in Colwyn Bay, focus on whether the officer breached professional standards of behaviour regarding use of force. PC Williams maintains that he acted appropriately under the circumstances and continues to deny any wrongdoing throughout the disciplinary process.

The disciplinary panel is considering eight distinct allegations of improper conduct stemming from the confrontation. Presenting representatives argued that the officer deployed an escalating series of unreasonable tactics, ranging from the application of pain compliance techniques with handcuffs to delivering rapid head strikes and deploying chemical incapacitant spray.

The internal disciplinary action follows earlier criminal proceedings in which the officer was cleared of formal criminal charges. In 2025, following a seven-day trial at Caernarfon in Gwynedd, PC Williams was acquitted by a jury of assault and intentional strangulation. Despite the criminal verdict, the police force is pursuing regulatory action to determine whether his actions met the threshold for gross misconduct and fell below the standard expected of serving officers.

The confrontation originated on a day in May 2023 when police were dispatched to an address in Porthmadog, Gwynedd, following reports of an active domestic dispute. Officers arriving on the scene were tasked with de-escalating an altercation that had generated concern among residents in the surrounding neighbourhood.

Upon their arrival, an attending woman informed responding personnel that Clark, who was 34 years old at the time, was behaving erratically. The hearing heard that the woman told officers Clark was heavily intoxicated on cannabis—described during the exchange as "wacky backy"—and was suspected of having consumed additional illicit substances.

The misconduct tribunal was shown recorded footage capturing the moment the encounter deteriorated. The panel reviewed multiple video recordings, including official footage obtained from police body-worn video cameras alongside supplementary video clips recorded on mobile phones by civilian bystanders who watched the arrest unfold.

According to evidence presented to the disciplinary panel, the encounter shifted rapidly when officers attempted to place Clark under arrest. The situation quickly turned physical, leading to a struggle that concluded with Clark being forced down to the ground by attending officers.

Among the specific charges examined, it is alleged that PC Williams deliberately used handcuffs as a pain compliance mechanism against Clark's wrist. The panel was told that the mechanical force applied caused the detainee to visibly wince and react in distress while pinned on the floor.

The most severe physical confrontation occurred when PC Williams placed Clark into a tight headlock, often referred to in the proceedings as a "choker." Footage recorded the officer gripping Clark’s neck firmly with one arm while maintaining control over his body on the ground.

During subsequent formal police interviews, Clark detailed the physical impact of the hold, stating that the pressure restricted his airway and left him unable to breathe properly. He recounted experiencing a sensation of slipping out of consciousness as the restraint around his neck was sustained during the struggle.

While maintaining the neck restraint with one arm, PC Williams is alleged to have used his free hand to deliver nine rapid punches directly into Clark’s head and facial area. The case against the officer emphasizes that these nine consecutive blows were delivered in quick succession without any discernible pause to assess Clark's compliance or reflect upon whether additional physical force remained necessary.

The panel was also presented with four separate allegations concerning the use or attempted deployment of an incapacitant spray during the arrest. Presenting officials stated that the repeated deployment of the chemical agent in these circumstances constituted another layer of disproportionate force against the suspect.

The final charge in the schedule of allegations pertains to the manner in which Clark was transferred into police custody vehicles. The tribunal heard that Clark was roughly thrown or dropped into the rear compartment of a police transport van while he was attempting to resist the officers.

Representatives presenting the case submitted that, taken individually and collectively, the eight contested actions constituted an entirely unreasonable application of physical force that breached core policing standards. The tribunal must now weigh whether the tactics were a justified response to an actively resisting suspect or an unlawful overreach of police power.

Following the initial submission of visual evidence and witness statements, the formal misconduct hearing at Colwyn Bay was adjourned, with proceedings scheduled to resume on Tuesday to hear further arguments and evidence.