By: Alexander McClelland, Jeffrey Bradley, & Lindsay Jennings

Today, Tracking (In)Justice releases a Fact Sheet: Spit Hoods & Deaths in Custody in Canada. In Canada, we have tracked a minimum of 9 deaths of people in custody where spit hoods were used during a use of force incident.  Since 2014, a minimum of 9 people have died in custody while wearing a spit hood in Canada, with 6 deaths in remand, or pre-trial detention, 2 deaths in police custody, and 1 death in immigration detention. All 9 deaths were men. Where race was publicly identified, 2 were Black-identified, and 1 was Indigenous.

To read more, download the Fact Sheet: Spit Hoods & Deaths in Custody in Canada

Due to a lack of information and transparency on the use of spit hoods by police, in jails and prisons, we cannot say that the use of spit hoods was related to the cause of any of these deaths. There is no data reported on the use of spit hoods by Canadian police, or in jails, and prisons.

Spit hood use is controversial & contested

Spit hoods are a controversial mesh-fabric restraint device used to prevent someone from biting or spitting in custodial settings. They are often forcibly put over someone’s head to cover the face and mouth, which can make it difficult to breathe. The continued usage of spit hoods has been deemed by human rights experts as inhumane and to contravene multiple international conventions, including the Convention Against Torture and the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (known as the Nelson Mandela Rules) – to both of which Canada is a signatory. [1]

Australian police & prisons have banned spit hoods

South Australia banned the use of spit hoods after Wayne Fella Morrison, an Indigenous man, died in 2016 after being restrained and put in a spit hood face down in the back of a van. [2] This year, the Australian Federal Police followed suit, and banned the use of spit hoods entirely. [3]

Canadian authorities continue to use spit hoods

Spit hoods are actively used by police and in jails and prisons across Canada. A common spit hood used is the Tranzport Hood; the package states:

“Warning: Improper use of TranZport Hood can cause injury or death. Improper use may cause asphyxiation, suffocation or drowning in one’s own fluids.” [4]

In the wake of deaths due to the use of spit hoods, policing and prison institutions have faced critiques in parts of Canada for lacking training or policies on the use on the restraint device. [5]

Lack of evidence & harm of spit hoods

Despite the continued use of spit hoods in Canada, there is limited research on the safety of the restraint devices.

One study in the US noted limitations into research on spit hoods, and stated, the “circumstances of the study do not replicate circumstances in which spit [hoods] are usually used, which are situations of conflict with law enforcement or health care personnel, with the subject often already restrained, possibly injured, lying down, and with spit or other body fluids on the spit [hood].” [6]

The use of spit hoods lacks a clear justification, as neither HIV nor HCV can be transmitted through saliva. Furthermore, the devices have also been shown to not be effective at preventing communicable diseases, such as COVID-19. [7]

In fact, spit hoods may impair police and prison officers’ ability to identify medical conditions and notice distress or pain. The typical use of multiple forms of restraint in conjunction with a spit hood is well evidenced in detention settings, where a spit hood is “most likely used in conjunction with another form of restraint.” [8]

Combining spit hoods with other uses of force and restraint may increase the likelihood of harm. Spit hoods are designed to block spit, vomit, blood or other substances escaping them, “so when a wearer discharges a substance into the hood, the breathability of the fabric dramatically drops and the risk of suffocation rises.” [9]

Tracking use of spit hoods is a challenge

Other jurisdictions, such as policing authorities in the UK, track the use of spit hoods and there have been public reports on their use. [10]

In Canada, this is not the case, and the understanding the scope of the use of spit hoods is a challenge. There is no data reported on the use of spit hoods by Canadian police, or in jails, and prisons.

To read more, download the Fact Sheet: Spit Hoods & Deaths in Custody in Canada

 

References:

[1] Australian Human Rights Commission. (February 17, 2023). The Australian Federal Police’s review on its use of spit hoods Submission by the Australian Human Rights Commission. https://humanrights.gov.au/our-work/legal/submission/australian-federal-polices-review-its-use-spit-hoods

[2] Kurmelovs. R. (Sept. 21, 2021). Spit hood ban passes South Australian parliament five years after Indigenous man’s death: Controversial restraint will be criminalised after state’s upper house backs bill with unanimous support. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/sep/23/spit-hood-ban-passes-south-australian-parliament-five-years-after-indigenous-mans-death

[3] Australian Human Rights Commission.(April, 14 2023). Commission welcomes banning of spit hoods by AFP. https://humanrights.gov.au/about/news/media-releases/commission-welcomes-banning-spit-hoods-afp

[4] Nasser, S. (Dec 14, 2020). Jail guards violated use-of-force policies in fatal restraint of Soleiman Faqiri, court documents suggest. CBC News. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/soleiman-faqiri-spit-hood-force-violated-policies-1.5836961

[5] See: Keung, N. (January 31, 2023). OPP has no policy on improvised spit protection, inquest told. Toronto Star. https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/opp-has-no-policy-on-improvised-spit-protection-inquest-told/article_b8730e0d-1001-5afa-af22-ef2d271aa92e.html; & Tutton, M. (June 21, 2021). Probe of Halifax cell death hears of unclear policies on use of spit hoods. Globe and Mail. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-probe-of-halifax-cell-death-hears-of-unclear-policies-on-use-of-spit/

[6] Lutz, M, et al. (2018). Physiological effects of a spit sock. University of California Dan Diego School of Medicine, pg.11. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/0xr1d56t

[7] See: Barré-Sinoussi F, et al. (2018). Expert consensus statement on the science of HIV in the context of criminal law. Journal of the International AIDS Society.21(7):e25161. doi: 10.1002/jia2.25161. PMID: 30044059; and, De Camargo, C. (2022). The weaponising of COVID-19: Contamination prevention and the use of spit hoods in UK policing. The Police Journal, 95(4), 595-616. https://doi-org.proxy.library.carleton.ca/10.1177/0032258X211018787

[8] Royal Commission into the Protection & Detention of Children in the Northern Territory (November, 17 2017.) Report of the Royal Commission into the Protection & Detention of Children in the Northern Territory Volume 2A, Chapter 13 Use of Force, pg. 249. https://www.royalcommission.gov.au/system/files/2020-09/Volume%202A.pdf

[9] Comyn, R. (February, 21 2019). The rise of spit hoods: dangerous, degrading and unjustified: The inhumane devices have been linked to deaths in custody and a robust case for their use has not been made. Liberty. https://www.libertyhumanrights.org.uk/issue/the-rise-of-spit-hoods/

[10] BBC News. (November, 12 2016). ‘Cruel’ spit hoods used by third of UK police forces. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-37938056

 

Cover image from: Nasser, S. (Dec 14, 2020). Jail guards violated use-of-force policies in fatal restraint of Soleiman Faqiri, court documents suggest. CBC News. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/soleiman-faqiri-spit-hood-force-violated-policies-1.5836961