The Police Ombudsman has found that a police officer was justified in discharging a warning shot to prevent four men, two of whom he believed to be armed, from breaking into a house in Antrim during a dispute between two local families.

Police patrols had been briefed about the dispute and had been ordered to look out for any suspicious activity around the families' homes.

Two police officers were on patrol in Antrim shortly before 0230 hours on 8 November 2006 when they received a police radio transmission ordering any nearby patrols to go to an address occupied by one of the families.

The patrol arrived at the property within seconds of the transmission and found four men trying to force entry to the house via a back door. Screams and shouting could be heard coming from inside the house.

An officer who responded to the incident said one of the men was holding a handgun, and another, who was known to police, appeared to have a gun tucked into the waistband of his jeans.

The officer shouted several warnings for the men to stop what they were doing. When he was ignored, he fired a single warning shot into the air. Three of the men managed to escape, including one who had apparently been in possession of a firearm. The other man was apprehended. CS Spray was used against him to effect his arrest once it was clear that he did not possess a firearm. This was a proportionate and necessary use of force.

It was established that the man arrested had a distinctive pattern on his T-shirt and a long hanging belt which the officer said he had initially mistaken for a gun. The description of the man's clothing was corroborated by CCTV footage of him at Antrim Police Station following his arrest.

There were no complaints made by any members of the public.

The Police Ombudsman concluded that intervening by firing a warning shot in an attack on the occupants of a house, by four men, one of whom he believed to be armed, the police officer prevented serious harm occurring.