The Police Ombudsman has concluded that police were justified in using a Taser to prevent a man causing serious injury to himself at a Belfast hostel on 8 October 2009.

Police had gone to the hostel after receiving a 999 call from a member of staff who reported that the man had a knife and was threatening to cut his own throat.

The first two officers to arrive at the scene found the man in what they described as, "a highly agitated state". He was in a small laundry room and was holding a knife.

The officers stayed with the man for over 20 minutes, talking to him and keeping him calm to prevent him self-harming until the arrival of specialist firearms officers. The specialist team had been instructed to continue to negotiate with the man, but to use Taser if necessary to prevent him causing serious injury or killing himself.

The officer, who subsequently discharged the Taser, said that when he arrived at the scene he considered the risks posed to various people. He assessed the risk to members of the public to be low, as they had been removed from the area, he said the risk to police was medium as no direct threat had been made against them and he considered the risk to the man with the knife to be high as he was making threats to injure himself.

When the man raised the knife to his own throat the officer considered that there was then an imminent danger of him causing himself serious injury or death. The officer drew his Taser, pointed it at the man and stepped further into the room. He then shouted "Taser, Taser, Taser" to warn his colleagues, and discharged the weapon, aiming for and striking the man's chest area. The Taser was effective and the male was immediately disarmed and restrained.

The three other officers present at the time of the discharge corroborated the officer's account, stating that the discharge occurred after the man raised the knife to his throat.

All discharges of PSNI firearms, including Tasers, are automatically referred by the police to the Police Ombudsman for independent investigation into the circumstances of the discharge and to establish if correct procedures and guidelines have been adhered to.

During their investigation of the case, Police Ombudsman investigators obtained and considered a range of evidence, including relevant police documentation, statements from police and civilian witnesses, medical evidence, electronic information from the Taser and also PSNI radio transmissions. House-to-house enquiries were also conducted in the area

Police training records were obtained and showed that the officer who discharged the Taser was properly trained and authorised in its use.

Having considered the evidence, the Police Ombudsman, Mr Al Hutchinson said, the police response to the situation had been, "graduated and proportionate."

He said the first two officers to arrive at the scene had, "demonstrated significant negotiation and communication skills which helped to ensure that the man did not cause himself any harm prior to the arrival of the specialist firearms unit."

When a decision was made to use Taser, Mr Hutchinson said, "current guidelines and procedures were adhered to, all decisions were properly authorised and throughout the operation the health and wellbeing of the man, of members of the public, and police officers was paramount."