The Police Ombudsman has found that police were justified in using impact rounds during disturbances in Craigavon on the evening of 27/28 February 2010.
Trouble broke out after police moved in to cordon off an area around a suspect device at Tullygally Road, in the Brownlow area of the town.
Police Tactical Support Groups (TSGs), deployed to the area to protect the scene as the device was dealt with, came under attack by a crowd throwing stones, bottles, fireworks and other missiles.
As the rioting intensified, iron bars and large pieces of masonry were used to attack police Land Rovers, two of which were immobilised.
Officers on the ground then requested permission to use Attenuated Energy Projectile (AEP) rounds against individuals identified as being involved in rioting.
Permission was granted, and at around midnight police used a speaker system to issue two warnings to the crowd that impact rounds would be used if the disorder continued.
Three rounds fired within seven minutes - all striking their targets.
When these were ignored, an officer discharged three AEP rounds within the space of seven minutes. All three were reported to hit their targets - one man was struck twice, with the other round striking another male.
Following the discharges, the crowd retreated and began to reduce in number. The TSG then remained on duty protecting the scene around the suspect device until the clearance operation was completed at around 1.05am.
During their investigation of the incident, Police Ombudsman investigators interviewed the officer who discharged the AEPs and the officer in charge of the use of AEPs. They stated that the rounds had been discharged in order to protect officers within the Land Rovers which had been severely damaged.
Investigators also viewed video footage of the disorder, analysed radio transmissions and examined police documentation, all of which corroborated the accounts of the incident provided by the officers involved.
The Police Ombudsman's Office also, for the first time, used a Bluetooth messaging system to allow mobile phone users in the area to accept a witness appeal message from the Police Ombudsman's Office.
House-to-house enquiries were conducted in the area, and training records were examined, which showed that the officer who discharged the rounds was properly trained and authorised to do so.
Having assessed the evidence, Police Ombudsman Al Hutchinson found that, given the serious risk to officers and the need to avoid disruption to the operation to deal with the suspect device, the use of AEPs during the incident was "necessary and proportionate."