One afternoon in June 2022, my client, Allen Normal was shopping in the heart of London and passed a police carrier that was parked up, close to a Boots store.
Having completed his shopping in the store, Allen returned outside and went to retrieve his bicycle, which was locked to a nearby lamppost.
At this time, two male Police Officers – now known to be PC Laurie and PC Minnerthey of the City of London Police, approached Allen and asked if he was “Alright” and what he was up to.
Allen was immediately apprehensive and asserted that he was find, but that he would not be answering any questions.
PC Minnerthey then began to accuse Allen of “Giving us the evils” as he had walked past their Police carrier and then of allegedly “Fiddling around with a lot of stuff” in the Boots store.
PC Minnerthey announced that he was going to search Allen under Section 1 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE), produced his handcuffs and reached out to grab Allen’s arms. Allen felt threatened and sought to clarify upon what grounds the officer wanted to search him, asserting that the Officers’ actions were unlawful. He knew his rights under the Police Codes of Practice – the ‘GOWISELY’ procedure, which Officers are supposed to adhere to, but in fact routinely abuse.
Ignoring this, the Officers now grabbed Allen’s arms and forcefully handcuffed him.
Again, Allen demanded to know on what grounds the Officers were asserting a legal power to search him. PC Minnerthey repeated his bizarre accusation: that Allen had been giving him and his colleagues “evils”, before then going into a shop and “fiddling around”.
PC Laurie then stated that as Allen walked down the road, he was seen “eyeballing” the Police carrier, “paying a lot of attention” to the Officers within, and had then gone into a shop where he was seen to be “fumbling around” and “potentially up to no good.” Numerous other officers now attended, it obviously being a slow day in the City of London…
The Officers continued to hold Allen – although he was not resisting them, or attempting to leave – and searched him, including removing his wallet and mobile phone from his possession.
Apparently having polished his script a little more, PC Minnerthey now advised Allen that – “You’ve appeared to be concealing yourself in the shop while you appeared to be fiddling about “anti”, not letting us get a word in edgeways. You’re extremely nervous, your breathing rate is up there, we think you’ve got something to hide. We suspect you might have been involved in something in the shop and therefore we’ve searched you under section 1 PACE for any stolen items.”
Allen correctly denied that the Officers’ had any grounds to detain and search him under section 1 of PACE; of course, this did not stop them.
The search having proved negative, Allen’s handcuffs were removed after a period of about 7 minutes.
Allen was outraged by the incident and felt as if he had been mugged, although at all times he kept his temper under control and spoke respectfully to the squad of Police Officers now assembled.
Aware of his rights, Allen ask PC Minnerthey for a Stop Form. He was at first (wrongly) told that a Stop Form could not be provided because he had not given his personal details (which he was under no legal obligation to do). Allen asserted that he was entitled to a Stop Form whereupon the Officers told him that he would have to subsequently attend Bishopsgate Police Station, in order to collect it.
His phone was now returned to him, and he was told that he was free to go.
A few days later, Allen duly attended Bishopsgate Police Station, required them to give him a copy of the Search Form and lodged a formal complaint. That complaint was summarily dismissed by Inspector Mackenzie.
Allen therefore turned to me for assistance, and when the City of London Police continued to maintain their denial of any wrongdoing, I instituted Court proceedings on behalf of my client, suing the Police for false imprisonment and assault and battery on the basis that the Officers had grossly misused their Stop and Search powers under section 1 of PACE because they did not honestly or reasonably suspect that Allen was in possession of “Stolen or prohibited articles.”
I am pleased to confirm that through those Court proceedings I was able to win for Allen compensatory damages of £8,500, plus his legal costs and a letter of apology from the City of London Police in the following terms:
“The Commissioner admits liability for false imprisonment and assault and battery as set out in your Particulars of Claim.
On behalf of the Commissioner, I accept that on the 22 June 2022 you should not have been detained or searched by the Commissioner’s Officers. The Officers’ grounds for stopping and searching you were not objectively reasonable in the circumstances. I unreservedly apologise to you on behalf of the Commissioner and confirm that the officers involved will be notified of this decision. I trust that this apology will go some way to restoring your trust and confidence in the City of London Police.”
You must be logged in to post a comment.