POLICE were right to restrain a man after he charged out his cell at them but not right to continue restraining him in the way they did, an inquest has ruled.

The inquest into the death of former teacher Meirion James from Crymych concluded this evening (January 24), where jurors agreed that Mr James died as a result of positional asphyxiation due to being restrained, following what was described as an "acute behavioural disturbance".

Mr James died on January 31, 2015, aged 53, following restraint at Haverfordwest Police Station, where he had been taken after calling police to say he had assaulted his mother.

Following the inquest, his sister Sian Vaughan-Thomas said: “Meirion was my much loved brother and a wonderful son and uncle to our mother and my children. It’s been a painful four-year wait for this inquest, and a tough few weeks hearing the evidence about what happened to Meirion.

"He shouldn’t have died. I hope that lessons will be learned so that this won’t happen to anyone else in the future, and that Meirion can rest in peace now.”

The jury concluded it was right for officers to have restrained Mr James after he rushed at them when they opened his cell door to check on him.

However, the jury said continuing to restrain Mr James while he was in the prone position on the floor was not appropriate and is likely to have contributed to his death.

The foreman of the jury said: "due to the excessive length of time in the prone position and Mr James's size, this resulted in his death."

Clare Richardson of Deighton Pierce Glynn, solicitor for the family, said: “The jury in this case heard shocking evidence, both about the missed opportunities as Meirion’s mental health deteriorated in the days and hours before his death and about the fatal restraint on 31 January 2015.

“Four years after Meirion’s death, this inquest jury has finally confirmed the link between the dangerous restraint and the death. No family should have to wait this long.”

One the day before his arrest Mr James had been admitted to Bronglais Hospital, Aberystwyth, by police following a road rage incident.

Mr James had been living with bipolar disorder for 29 years and had recently had his prescription for this illness changed.

Jurors concluded that the arresting officer on January 30 should have told doctors Mr James had been arrested under section 136 of the mental health act.

This, they said, could have then led to a process where Mr James may have been kept in hospital for his own safety.

Overall, the jury found there was a “failure to pass significant information and follow procedures”, from the initial incident at the roadside on 30 January 2015 to the point of Mr James’ death.

The coroner, Paul Bennett, consoled Mr James’ family for their loss and for the length of time they had to wait for the inquest to conclude.

“Can I express my belated condolences to Mrs Vaughan-Thomas and the family. I know it has not been an easy process,” he said.

Following the inquest, Assistant Chief Constable of Dyfed-Powys Police, Vicki Evans, said: “On behalf of Dyfed-Powys Police, I want to express my sincere sympathy to Mr James’ family and friends who have had to go through an extended period of distress to reach this point.

“Mr James died in tragic circumstances and I cannot begin to comprehend the distress and grief this has caused for his family. Whilst I fully appreciate that nothing can lessen their loss, I hope the closing of Mr James’ inquest will help ease some of their distress.

“Ensuring the public are safe is a priority for our officers and staff and we deeply regret it when anyone comes to harm during or following police contact.

“Immediately after the incident we referred the case to the Independent Police Complaints Commission, now the IOPC. We fully co-operated with their investigation and their recommendations have been actioned.

"Improvements have been made in the four years since Mr James’ death, both in Dyfed-Powys Police and nationally, in the way that police support people who are suffering from a mental health illness.

"We acknowledge the return of a narrative verdict and will ensure that the coroner’s detailed report is carefully considered and any recommendations acted upon."