A POLICE inspector who was duty inspector when Charlie Rowley and Dawn Sturgess were poisoned has admitted he felt 'professionally embarrassed' after the incident, the inquiry heard. 

Inspector Marcus Beresford Smith appeared at the Dawn Sturgess Public Inquiry on October 18. 

The police inspector defended the police decision which saw officers 'dismiss' paramedic concerns that Charlie Rowley was suffering from a nerve-agent poisoning on June 30. 

He said: "Given all the information and intelligence I had at this time, [police decided to] treat this incident as a drugs overdose rather than any chemical incident or Novichok incident.

"Obviously if we believed it was a Novichok attack, we would have absolutely closed off as many raids as we possibly could have done to protect the public, but we do need that initial information before we do that."

Part of the questioning saw Michael Mansfield, representing the Sturgess family, hold Mr Beresford Smith accountable for his dealing of the evening which saw Mr Rowley taken to hospital, hours after Ms Sturgess had taken ill with the same address and similar symptoms.

Mr Mansfield asked the inspector: "The document says there came a time after these events - July 4 - the day it was discovered that Novichok was the cause, you were spoken to by the chief constable.

"I’ll put it to you straight away. You said you were or you felt professionally embarrassed. Is that right?"

Mr Beresford Smith replied: "On reflection, sir, given that I made the decisions at the scene which are obviously wrong, which I need to apologise, yes it would have been embarrassing."

READ MORE: Dawn Sturgess Inquiry: Paramedic who attended to Charlie Rowley

Mr Mansfield replied: "If you did say words to the effect that you felt embarrassed, have you learnt any lessons from what happened on that day in which you were concerned?"

The inspector told the inquiry that no 'particular lessons' have been learned, but insisted that there have been a 'number of learnings' from the incident. He continued: "The main learning would be the introduction of JESIP which is now embedded within the force. That would be my main point."

When further promoted by Mr Mansfield what would have changed if the protocols of JESIP were in place, the inspector said: "The scenario, the information that I had at the time, well, I don't think it would have made any difference [...] to decision making." 

READ MORE: Novichock took just 15 minutes to make Dawn Sturgess ill

When he arrived on scene, Mr Beresford Smith entered the property, which was within a cordon, without consulting with fire or ambulance commanders and without PPE - other than gloves.

Mr Mansfield replied: " I'm going to suggest to you it would make a lot of difference if police officers at the scene - I'm talking about you particularly as the senior one - had recognised there was a possibility of a hazardous material, a dangerous situation. That would've helped, wouldn't it?

"You say you had no information. You did have information, which was coming from inside where the problem was, weren't you? It was considered to be a chemical situation.

"And where you have a situation which could be of danger to the public, you have a duty, do you agree to ensure that precautionary steps are taken?"

Mr Beresford Smith agreed, and replied: "I wanted to get as much information and intelligence as I could before I made the decision.

"There were cordons in place by the time I got there. I thought they were sufficient enough at that moment in time to deal with that situation until we got further information and evidence."

"I can only repeat, sir, is what I said, that all the information I had and intelligence didn't point to that [nerve agent poisoning]."

The inquiry will continue on October 28 in London.