Neil Wilby Media

It is now almost thirteen years since Neil Wilby, the author of this article, and Iain Gould, now, very arguably, the country’s most effective police action lawyer, first collaborated. 

The case concerned a Bradford man, Anwar Gillespie, who had suffered some quite shocking police brutality in 2007 and equally troubling treatment, thereafter, by West Yorkshire Police‘s Professional Standards Department, whom contemptuously swept aside Anwar’s complaints over the succeeding two years.

Iain Gould was not so easily brushed off and, after a two year, gloves-off legal battle eventually secured a compensation payment of £15,000 (worth £22,800 today) and a richly deserved apology. One that meant more to Anwar, a modest, humble man, and described by in a BBC report as ‘a good samaritan’, than any amount of money (read more here). 

Much more recently, last month in fact, Iain wrote about the sense of satisfaction that can be achieved by a claimant in a police action through a well-deserved, but hard-fought win in collaboration with their lawyer, and a case in point is the one which he describes in this blog post published on 25th March, 2024. In which his client eventually prevailed – but only after Greater Manchester Police (GMP) had fought him, metaphorically, tooth and nail through the Magistrates’ and County Court systems – and, literally so, in the living room of his girlfriend’s house.

This seriously troubling account is reproduced, again with Iain’s kind permission: It is an important public interest piece written by a professional whose blogging skills almost match his renowned and specialist legal expertise. 

His client faced police brutality and a robust defence from GMP , but his determination to achieve justice saw him through to victory; and this is how he did it.   

“In the summer of 2019, Ben (name changed to protect the identity of both the client and his partner) was in a relationship with a woman who lived in Greater Manchester. 

“One afternoon, whilst Ben was at his partner’s house, the couple had an argument, as couples do, concerning the behaviour of Ben’s partner’s teenage daughter. Although voices were raised inside the house, there was no violence involved and nobody called the police.  

“Unfortunately, police officers including PC Day and PC Hassan were in the vicinity investigating an unrelated matter, and overhearing the argument, took it upon themselves to intervene. The officers entered the garden of the house and PC Day opened the back door, where he was met by Ben and his partner.  

“PC Day said that the officers “Wanted to come and speak to you and see what the shouting was about.” 

“Ben considered that the presence of the officers was unnecessary and replied “Well, I don’t want to speak to you.”  His partner said that there had been an argument and that she wanted Ben to leave.  Ben wholeheartedly agreed, telling the officers “Which I am doing when I’ve got my stuff.” 

“Nevertheless , PC Day stepped into the house, uninvited, and referred to the “shouting and screaming” (although this was certainly no longer ongoing).  

“Whilst Ben’s partner went upstairs, PC Hassan pushed him into the front room (placing his right hand upon Ben’s chest) and was followed by PC Day.

“Ben walked into the kitchen, where he again said that he would collect his stuff and go, to which PC Hassan replied “That’s sound”.   

“Ben made it clear that he just wanted to “Get out of this situation” and “Get my stuff and go.”  PC Day said “Right, well get your stuff and go and we’ll supervise it.” 

“But then – without warning –  PC Hassan then grabbed Ben’s left arm, announcing that he was unhappy with his behaviour. 

“Maintaining a firm grip on Ben’s arm, PC Hassan then pushed Ben out of the kitchen and back into the living room.  

“PC Hassan now announced that Ben was under arrest for “Breach of the Peace” and simultaneously applied a handcuff to his left wrist, whilst PC Day took hold of Ben’s right wrist. PC Hassan told Ben to put his hands behind his back.

“Ben was bewildered at the officers’ unnecessary force, and sought to remonstrate verbally, but without any physical resistance.  

“However, his complaints fell on deaf ears, as without warning, and whilst Ben was talking to PC Hassan, PC Day sought to pull Ben to the ground – but lost his footing/grip as he did so, causing both he and Ben to fall towards the floor. Ben was shocked, but managed to steady himself and stood back up.   

“Unfortunately, his shock was only just beginning, as Ben then felt a blow to his face from PC Hassan and was then grappled by multiple officers. Ben attempted to defend himself from this assault by pulling his arms free, and shaking the officers off, but was unsuccessful. The officers delivered multiple blows to Ben’s face and body and forced him back against the wall, and then onto the floor in the corner of the room. 

“In effect, Ben had been ‘mobbed’ by the officers, the two male officers having been joined by one of their female colleagues. He was completely overwhelmed.  

“Whilst Ben was lying on his front on the floor, with other officers holding down his body, PC Day then gripped Ben’s neck, pushed his face into the carpet and sprayed him in the face with CS gas from ‘point blank’ range.  Ben was in agony and struggled to breathe. 

“This type of ‘spray-painting’ of an already subdued victim is a sadly common feature of this type of Police brutality case, in Iain’s experience – irrespective of sex or age.   

“Ben’s ordeal had not finished there; PC Day now punched him in the face and PC Hassan delivered further blows with his hands to Ben’s back, all whilst Ben was being held face-down on the floor. 

“Ben’s arms were then taken hold of and he was handcuffed to the rear whilst still on the floor, with multiple officers applying pressure to various parts of his body, including his torso and legs. 

“Ben was immediately aware of significant pain and discomfort in his face and body from the blows, and of burning sensations to his face and in his mouth and blood coming from his mouth. He was also struggling to breathe and genuinely feared that he might die.  Extremely frightened, Ben called out for an ambulance, begging the officers with the words “I’ll do whatever you want.”  

“Ben was then marched out of the house, the prisoner of the officers, and placed in a van. Before being taken to custody, however, Ben had to first be transported to hospital for attention to the injuries which the officers had inflicted upon him and to be ‘patched up’. Whilst there he underwent a facial x-ray and it was noted that he had a loose tooth, which subsequently fell out. 

“To quite literally add insult to injury, whilst at the hospital, Ben was further arrested for the alleged offence of assaulting the three police officers who had in fact assaulted him.

“Again, this is another sadly typical feature of such cases – that the innocent victim of police violence faces charges that could result in his criminalisation and imprisonment, all for the ‘crime’ of having been beaten up by the officers in the first place, as if they feel such charges now need to be laid to justify the level of force they have used.  

“Thereafter, Ben was taken to a local police station, where he was processed and incarcerated.  

“Early the following morning, Ben was interviewed under caution and then yet further arrested for assault with the intention of resisting arrest. Once again, Iain viewed this as the police trying to bury their own wrongdoing in a shallow grave of false charges, showering their victim with the ‘dirt’ of criminal offences.  This is a sadly common tactic by the police, and Iain can recall many occasions when it has been utilised by GMP, in particular (read here). 

“Ben was eventually released ‘under investigation’ after a period of 14 hours in custody. 

“Even this was not the end of his ordeal; some six months later, in February 2020, a Postal Requisition was sent to Ben charging him with the following offences – 

a.      Assaulting PC Day thereby occasioning him actual bodily harm contrary to Section 47 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1986. 

b.      Assaulting by beating PC Prudence, an Emergency Worker, namely a Police Officer, acting in the exercise of the functions of such a worker, contrary to Section 39 of the Criminal Justice Act and Section 1 of the Assault on Emergency Workers (offences) Act, 2018.  

c.      Assaulting PC Hassan with intent to resist or prevent the lawful apprehension or detainer of himself, contrary to Section 38 of the Offences Against the Person Act, 1861. 

“Ben, of course, pleaded not guilty to these trumped-up charges, but had them and hence the real prospect of being wrongly convicted and being sent to prison hanging over him for well over a year; all against the stressful backdrop of the Covid pandemic and our national lockdowns, until the case was eventually listed for trial in June 2021 at Manchester Crown Court (a trial actually conducted at the Lowry theatre, owing to the continued restrictions of the pandemic). 

“The stress which Ben felt at the thought of imprisonment was made all the worse by the fact that in the interim, he and his partner had been blessed with the birth of a baby girl and Ben was tormented at the thought of being separated from his daughter by incarceration.

“All of this played havoc with Ben’s mental health, causing him to become extremely anxious and withdrawn, and devastating his faith in the inherent justice of ‘the system’ and the police in particular. 

“Then, at Court, the Crown Prosecution Service chose to offer no evidence and Ben was found not guilty on all three counts. 

“That decision indicates the objective weakness of the evidence against Ben – the incident was caught in detail on multiple officers’ body cameras and clearly the CPS lawyers had realised that they were on a hiding to nothing pursuing it.  

“Why had Ben been charged in the first place and have to wait all this time for his innocence to be secured? As Iain has already highlighted earlier in this piece, he strongly feels that the decision to charge was, perversely but precisely, because of the level of force the police had used against him.  

“It might now have been hoped that when Iain presented a civil claim for compensation to GMP on behalf of Ben,  that they would see sense and do the right thing; but instead, they denied liability, giving him no choice but to issue County Court proceedings against the Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police, which were met with an apparently robust defence.  

“GMP failed to take this further opportunity to admit their culpability, and, instead, threw buckets of time and money at this case, apparently determined to bring all resources to bear to deny Ben’s entitlement to civil redress for the wrongs he had suffered; including serving statements from all the officers involved and fighting the case almost all the way to trial. 

“Ultimately, Iain’s determination and Ben’s courage in pursuing the case, saw him through to victory and GMP cracked in the ‘home straight’  a few months before trial, agreeing to pay Ben £30,000 damages plus his legal costs (which, as Iain notes, will be substantial).  

“One would like to think that GMP and its officers will learn a valuable lesson from this case, and curb future practices of attempting to hide police brutality and wrongful arrests behind the smokescreen of meritless prosecutions… but like someone who’s just been sprayed with CS gas at point-blank range, please don’t hold your breath. 

“Iain Gould can be contacted using this page and the online form within it.

The chief constable of Greater Manchester Police, or his Head of Professional Standards, has been approached via the force press office with a request for a statement.

Recently appointed Head of GMP’s Professional Standards Branch, Detective Chief Superintendent Mike Allen, said in a statement on a different issue last November: “Public trust and confidence in the police is vital and the force does not underestimate the importance of officers and staff demonstrating the highest standards of professional behaviour towards members of the public and their colleagues, as the majority do.”

Page last updated: Thursday 4th April, 2024 at 1325 hours

Thank you for reading and a polite request: If you feel this article is of value and in the public interest, and wish to make a contribution to the running costs of this website, it would be very much appreciated. Donations can made securely (and anonymously if required), via Buy Me A Coffee at this link or via PayPal at this link.

Corrections: Please let me know if there is a mistake in this article. I will endeavour to correct it as soon as possible.

Picture credit: Iain Gould

Right of reply: If you are mentioned in this article and disagree with it, please let me have your comments. Provided your response is not defamatory it will be added to the article.

© Neil Wilby 2015-2024. Unauthorised use, or reproduction, of the material contained in this article, without permission from the author, is strictly prohibited. Extracts from, and links to, the article (or blog) may be used, provided that credit is given to Neil Wilby Media, with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.