'No case to answer' for officer who shot man

A police firearms officer will not face misconduct proceedings over the fatal shooting of an unarmed man in Coventry in 2019.

Former soldier Sean Fitzgerald, 31, was shot at a property during a raid carried out by West Midlands Police.

He was exiting the back of the premises on Burnaby Road and was unarmed and holding a black mobile phone, which the officer who shot him said he believed was a gun.

The Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) has since reviewed new evidence presented at Fitzgerald's inquest and has concluded that the officer has no case to answer for his actions - a decision which has disappointed the brother of the deceased.

Liam Fitzgerald said he strongly disagreed with the IOPC finding, believing the officer - referred to only as Officer K in the inquest proceedings - should face a gross misconduct hearing.

He stated he believed evidence at the inquest "undermined" the version of events presented by the officer, including the contention that the former soldier was armed.

"We consider he should have faced a gross misconduct hearing regarding his use of force, which would necessarily consider the truth of the accounts he has given since Sean's death," he stated.

The IOPC said its initial investigation ended in October 2023 when it decided not to refer the case to the Crown Prosecution Service to consider criminal charges against the firearms officer.

However, it claimed at the time it was its opinion that a misconduct panel could find that the officer did not have an honestly held belief that Mr Fitzgerald was holding a weapon, and therefore there may be a case to answer in relation to misconduct.

An inquest into Fitzgerald's death which ended in May 2025 concluded that he was killed lawfully.

The IOPC said it had since reviewed its decision-making on the basis of new evidence presented at the hearing.

That included expert testimony and a digital reconstruction showing that the officer could have had a line of sight to the mobile phone, which experts said could have been mistaken for a gun immediately before the fatal shot was discharged.

IOPC director Derrick Campbell said: "Our sympathies remain with the family of Sean Fitzgerald and all those affected by his death.

"This has been one of the most detailed, complex investigations we've carried out in recent years and involved a huge amount of evidence gathering and examination of sensitive intelligence.

"The determination over whether the officer should face disciplinary proceedings largely came down to a split-second decision in what was a dynamic, fast-moving, armed police operation."

In light of new evidence, the IOPC said it believed it would no longer be reasonable for a disciplinary panel to conclude that the phone held by Fitzgerald was obscured from view until after the decision to shoot had been taken.

It also said there was insufficient evidence that the officer did not see the phone and experts were unanimous in explaining how a black mobile phone could be mistaken for a gun in the circumstances.

Campbell said: "Our conclusion was that the officer has no case to answer for gross misconduct, but I acknowledge Mr Fitzgerald's family did not agree with our opinion.

"We have reached this position after extensive analysis and careful consideration of whether the evidence now meets the legal threshold we are required to apply."

He added: "We are extremely conscious of the time taken to reach the current position and we are sorry for any distress this has caused."

Campbell also emphasised that while it was relatively rare for firearms officers to discharge their weapons, and rarer still for someone to die as a result, there must be proper investigation and accountability when it happened.

The IOPC's investigation also looked at the planning and implementation of the firearms operation and all of the officers who were directly involved in that were treated as witnesses throughout.

Liam Fitzgerald said: "It has been seven years since Sean was killed and our faith in the IOPC has continuously been eroded.

"The time they have taken to complete their initial investigation was totally unacceptable.

"We also believe the investigation was flawed from the start; from allowing Officer K to see his body worn video before giving a full statement to poorly-selected experts who gave opinions on matters they were not qualified.

"We believe a good quality timely investigation would have shown that Officer K did not honestly believe Sean was a threat and that his actions were not only wrong but unlawful.

"We now want to close the door on this chapter and remember Sean for the fun-loving person that he was and not the manner in which he died."

Follow BBC Coventry & Warwickshire on BBC Sounds, Facebook, X and Instagram.