In January 2019, my client James left home to go to his local post office to post a letter. It was a very cold day and he was wearing a thick jacket with a Hoody beneath with his hood up. James went to the post office, paid the postage for his letter to be delivered by recorded delivery and then returned to his car. En route, he decided to put the receipt for postage in his wallet. His wallet was in his left hand back trouser pocket. He twisted his body so as to take out his wallet and in doing so noticed a marked police van turn onto the road behind him. James put his receipt into his wallet and then returned his wallet to his back pocket and continued forward. The time was approximately 10.00.
James then heard a male voice from behind say “Stop there”. James turned and saw a uniformed police officer now known to be PC Armstad. He also noticed other uniformed police officers in the vicinity. James said in a calm manner, “What’s your problem?” PC Armstrad replied “When we’ve gone past, it looked like you were fiddling with something, when you’ve seen the (police) carrier, you’ve walked away”.
James was asked to remove his hands from his pockets which he did without question. PC Armstad continued, “We just want to stop you to see what you’re doing here.” James replied, “I’m free to be here.”
PC Armstrad then asked James if he had any ID on him and what his name was. James correctly advised that he didn’t need to show any ID or give his name. James asked what section of PACE the Officer was using to “stop and antagonise” him.
PC Armstrad said “We’re out on patrol, this is an area known as for high volume crime, there’s a lot of drug dealing that goes on here, we’ve seen you standing there, fiddling with something in your hands…you’ve tried to walk away as soon as you’ve seen the carrier and you’ve been completely evasive to everything I’ve said so I’m going to detain you under Section 23 of the Misuse of Drugs Act for a search…my name is PC Armstrad. He then confirmed the station he was based at advised “I’ll be searching you for any drugs or drug paraphernalia. You’ll be entitled to a copy.”
James felt he was being racially profiled and challenged PC Armstrad’s grounds to stop and detain him. PC Armstrad said, “This is a high volume drug area, we’ve seen you fiddling with something in your hands which you’ve then put in your pocket, we don’t know what this is, you’ve tried to walk away when you’ve seen the carrier and you’ve given us absolutely nothing to explain why you’re here or what you’re doing so I’m going to satisfy myself now that you’ve nothing on you by searching you under Section 23.”
At this, the 2 Officers either side of James, took hold of James’ upper arms and wrists. James said, “Do not hold my hands” several times but was ignored. James advised the officers that he had not seen the carrier, that he felt harassed and that he was under no obligation to explain why he was in the area.
Whilst James was still being held either side, PC Armstrad unzipped James’ jacket and took from an inner pocket his phone.
As this was happening, James again requested several times for the Officers either side of him to let go of his hands.
At this, a fourth officer, PC Gardiner who had been standing behind James grabbed James’ right arm and sought to handcuff his right wrist. Other Officers also applied force to bring James’ arms behind his back and force him up against a wall.
James repeatedly asked for the Officers to let go of his hands and asserted that the Officers were hurting him.
Whilst James was being forcibly restrained by 4 other Officers, PC Gardiner delivered 3 knee strikes in quick succession to James’ upper leg/lower back region. James was then handcuffed to the rear.
PC Gardiner now advised James that he was “under arrest for obstruction of a drug search.” James protested that the Officers had “assaulted” him, and that the Officers had manhandled him for nothing. James was escorted to the officers’ carrier and aggressively forced to sit down. He was then transported to the local Police station. During the journey, James repeatedly advised that his wrists were hurting and for the officers to remove the handcuffs. His request was refused.
At the station, James went before the custody sergeant and was booked into Custody. Although the handcuffs were removed. James was now subjected a strip search causing James to feel extremely embarrassed, humiliated and degraded. The search was negative.
According to the Custody Record, the arrest circumstances were recorded as follows. “DP was stopped with a view to completing a search under S23 MDA. DP refused to comply and fought with officers in order to prevent the search. After arrest DP refused to provide a name and address. (DP is a intermittently co-operative and un-cooperative on arrival at the police station).
James was then obliged to provide his fingerprints, DNA and to be photographed before being escorted to a cell and then later interviewed.
Finally, at approximately 20.40, some 10.5 hours after his ordeal had begun James was brought out of his cell and advised that no further action would be taken and he was released.
According to police documentation, the case was subsequently reviewed by a senior officer who concluded that “There was no evidence to suggest there had been any obstruction of the search” and on that basis it was determined that no further action should be taken.
I pursued a claim against the Metropolitan Police on James’ behalf for unlawful arrest and assault. In response, the Metropolitan Police (of course) denied liability and it was necessary to institute court proceedings.
Shortly before trial, settlement terms were agreed with James receiving a five figure sum together with his legal fees and subsequently an agreement to delete all of James’ data obtained by reason of this arrest.
Read more here: The GOWISELY procedure and unlawful stop and search.
You must be logged in to post a comment.