We represented a defendant who was charged with breaking a police officer’s nose in a deliberate assault occasioning actual bodily harm.

Background

Firearms officers attended our client’s address to execute a search warrant under s46 The Firearms Act 1968. The prosecution alleged that when officers entered the address our client acted in an aggressive and threatening manner. They stated that our client actively resisted officers whilst on the stairs and intentionally broke a police officers nose.

The officers gained entry to the property where our client, his partner and their two young children lived. Our client came down the stairs in a panic and asked the officers what they were doing. His main priority was to make sure that his two young children were safe during the ordeal. The officers dealt with our client in an unsympathetic and aggressive way and gave no regard to the young children present. They continued to pull at our client on the staircase, even when they knew the risks and dangers to using such force. Our client ended up being dragged down the stairs and fell onto the police officer. This caused the officer’s nose to bleed and it was later confirmed to be broken.

Our Involvement

We represented the defendant at the police station, and he denied that he had assaulted the officer. He was bailed to return and was later released pending investigation. He was then postal requisitioned to attend Birmingham Magistrates Court. 

At the first hearing he entered a Not Guilty plea and the Magistrates Court accepted that it was a case that was suitable for trial at the Magistrates Court.

We submitted a skeleton argument dealing with the lawfulness of the arrest and detention of our client. We can confirm that no firearm was ever found at the property. The body worn video footage of the arrest and detention did not show any aggressive or threatening behaviour by our client. We argued that the officers’ use of force was unlawful in those circumstances, and we emphasised our client’s entitlement to act in self-defence when faced with unlawful violence.  

Outcome

At trial, the police officers were cross examined in relation to their training and knowledge of police powers. They demonstrated to the court that they firstly did not know the powers they have in such circumstances and that the execution of the warrant had been poorly planned. No regard had been given to the presence of young children in the property and during cross examination the officers confirmed that they had no regard for them and how this set of circumstances would have made both them and the defendant feel. After some deliberation, the Magistrates found the client Not Guilty confirming it was an accident.

Our client was represented by Lauren Clark.