Met PC sacked for taunting and injuring homeless man in arrest

Farok did not respond to the man’s requests for an explanation regarding the accusation of resisting arrest. Video evidence revealed the officer adjusting the handcuffs in a manner that inflicted pain, all while continuing to claim that the man was resisting. Because the handcuffs were secured behind his back, the man was unable to use his hands to break his fall when Farok pushed him to the ground, causing him to land face-first on the pavement. This resulted in a cut near the man’s right eyebrow that required hospital treatment and left a visible pool of blood on the ground.

In November 2025, Farok was acquitted of assault by beating following a criminal trial. Despite this, a separate misconduct panel determined that Farok had violated police standards related to the use of force, his authority, as well as respect and courtesy. As a consequence, he will be added to the College of Policing barred list, effectively barring him from future employment within policing.

The Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) clarified that criminal trials and disciplinary hearings have distinct objectives. Criminal trials focus specifically on whether a criminal offence has taken place, while police disciplinary processes assess breaches of professional standards and decide appropriate sanctions if violations are found.

This distinction highlights why Farok’s acquittal in the criminal court did not prevent the misconduct panel from imposing professional accountability measures. The case illustrates the dual system of justice and regulation in place for police conduct, ensuring that officers are held to standards beyond just criminal liability