Pc in airport incident with brothers tells court conduct was ‘professional'
Mohammed Fahir Amaaz, 20, and Muhammad Amaad, 26, are said to have struck out after police were called to respond to a reported assault at the Starbucks cafe in Terminal 2 arrivals on July 23 last year, when Amaaz is said to have headbutted a customer.
Pc Zachary Marsden was one of three officers who shortly after approached Amaaz in T2's car park paystation area with a view to arrest him, Liverpool Crown Court has heard.
The Crown say Amaaz resisted and his brother then intervened as they subjected the three officers to a 'high level of violence'.
Cross-examining Pc Marsden on Tuesday, Imran Khan KC, defending Amaaz, said: 'It is his case that last year on July 23 you made a series of mistakes, some or all which were not in accordance with your police training which ultimately resulted in your conduct falling below the professional standards required of a police officer.
'And you used unlawful force against him, leaving him to defend himself and his brother.'
Mr Khan added: 'You went in, all three of you, and held on to Mr Amaaz which rendered your actions unlawful because the force used was unjustified, disproportionate and not necessary.'
Jurors heard that Pc Marsden has served Greater Manchester Police for about five years following a spell as a special constable with Lancashire Constabulary.
The officer had regular duties at the airport as an authorised firearms officers since April 2023.
Mr Khan asked him: 'As far as you personally are concerned, how would you characterise your performance as a police officer in general?'
Pc Marsden said: 'Professional.'
Mr Khan said: 'In relation to the events we are dealing with, how would you assess your performance as a police officer that day?'
Pc Marsden repeated: 'Professional.'
Mr Khan said: 'Having looked at the CCTV, do you consider there were any aspects of your performance that fell below the standards required of a police officer that day?'
'No, said Pc Marsden.
Pc Marsden said he had received a report of 'two Asian males fighting outside Starbucks' and on arrival was told by a member of the public, Abdulkareem Ismaeil, that he had been headbutted by a male in a blue tracksuit who had made off towards the car park.
Mr Khan said: 'You potentially had two suspects or two victims.
'It appears you were taking Mr Ismaeil's word for it?'
Pc Marsden replied: 'It's unfortunate I was not able to talk to the male in blue as he attacked me before I could engage in any form of communication.'
He said his plan was to escort the suspect from the crowd in the paystation area and to arrest him outside where he would have radio signal and a 'line of sight' of his colleagues.
Mr Khan suggested that announcing his presence as a police officer as he entered the area would have been 'one of the better options', Pc Marsden said: 'I did not deem that to be a safe option.
'My honestly held belief was that it was not appropriate to explain our attendance in the hope that he would comply and leave with us.
'Based on my policing experience, someone who has been violent once is more likely to be violent again when challenged.'
Amaaz is alleged to have assaulted Pc Marsden and Pc Lydia Ward, causing them actual bodily harm.
He is also accused of the assault of Pc Ellie Cook and the earlier assault of Mr Ismaeil.
Amaad is alleged to have assaulted Pc Marsden, causing actual bodily harm.
Both men, from Rochdale, Greater Manchester, deny the allegations.
Mr Khan said to Pc Marsden: 'Is the position this, that throughout the incident the force you used was justified, proportionate and reasonable?'
'Yes,' said Pc Marsden.
The witness said he was met with initial resistance from Amaaz so decided to put his hand on the back of the suspect's neck and push him downwards to knock him off balance.
Mr Khan said: 'Had you considered that might be frightening to Mr Amaaz, what you were doing?'
Pc Marsden said: 'No. My concerns were my safety and my colleagues' safety.'
As the second defendant intervened the officer threw two punches, the court heard.
Mr Khan said: 'You are the first person to throw any blows in this incident, aren't you?'
Pc Marsden said: 'A pre-emptive strike, yes.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
36 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Reform welfare or become a failed state: that is Britain's only remaining choice
Whitney Ainscough boasts that she makes £500,000 a year through her social media posts. Those posts essentially tell people what to say to exploit the welfare rules. The mother of three from Rotherham walks her subscribers through the buzz words and correct answers to give in order to be awarded benefits. In one post, she revelled in the fact that she was herself being given £1,151.90 a week by taxpayers. 'Why would I get a job?' she asked. 'I get your monthly wage in a week – so why would I put myself out and get a job? I mean, I'm living my f***ing best life!' Ms Ainscough is one of an army of online 'sickfluencers': people who make a living out of coaching others on how to qualify for benefits. In his recent Channel 4 documentary, Fraser Nelson met a consultant who charged £750 for a three-hour session on how to qualify for the maximum allocation on incapacity or disability payments. That is an hourly rate not far off some London KCs. Yet, such are the perverse incentives created by our benefits system that, for many would-be claimants, it is a reasonable up-front investment. If you have paid taxes throughout your working life, you may be shaking with anger as you read. The realisation that middle-men – or, more often, middle-women – are getting rich by steering people towards undeserved payments is infuriating. But sickfluencers are the by-products of our rotten system, not its authors. If we don't keep the kitchen clean, we can hardly blame the bacteria. As Charlie Munger liked to say, 'Show me the incentive and I'll show you the outcome'. Like the Channel people traffickers, sickfluencers are facilitators. They service a demand created by perverse incentives. In the one case, a benefits system which, according to the Centre for Social Justice, will soon let people earn £2,500 more than the minimum wage; in the other, an asylum system where judges seek always and everywhere to overturn deportation orders. We blame the people traffickers because we don't like to dwell on the fact that the migrants who pay them are criminals. We think of ourselves as compassionate, and so don't enjoy asking why genuine refugees would be desperate to leave France. In the same way, blaming sickfluencers allows us not to insult claimants – some of whom are indubitably disabled, and all of whom vote. Why, then, did I begin the column with Ms Ainscough? You, after all, are a reader of the nation's leading quality newspaper. His Majesty's Telegraph is not a sensationalist tabloid. Should I not be persuading you with facts and figures rather than making your blood boil with stories of a benefits claimant who holidays in Cyprus and films her posts from behind the wheel of what looks like a Range Rover? Maybe. But here's the problem. The numbers don't stir people to the pitch of emotion which, on their merits, they should. Perhaps they are simply too large. I always found, as an MEP, that telling people that the EU was wasting £10 billion on this or that project would elicit a resigned shrug, whereas telling them that I could pay my wife £14,000 a month prompted purple, choking fury. We can all imagine what we would do with £14,000. If people truly understood what the figures implied, there would be no more immediate issue in politics. Those Labour MPs who voted down the mildest attempt to slow the increase in incapacity benefits would, instead of complimenting themselves on their big-heartedness, be fending angry mobs from their constituency surgeries. Consider, one more time, some of the statistics. Around 3,000 people a day are signed off as too sick to work. The total number of claimants is forecast by the government to go from 3.3 million to 4.1 million by the end of this parliament. According to the NHS Confederation, in 2021-22, 63,392 people went straight from university onto long-term sickness benefits. The fastest rise is among 25- to 34-year-olds, an incredible increase of 69 per cent in five years. (Incredible in every sense: such a sudden and cataclysmic explosion in disability would surely be visible on the streets.) In Birmingham, one in four working-age adults is inactive. One. In. Four. Even at the height of the Great Depression, the proportion in our second city never rose so high. Then, mass worklessness was treated as the most important challenge facing the nation; now, we barely notice. Behind each of those numbers is someone trapped in the system, scared to find a job and paradoxically lose income, possibly bringing up children in a household severed from the rhythms of a working day. If the waste of human potential does not bother you, consider the viability of the British state. The total cost of benefits has risen from £244 billion a year on the eve of the pandemic to £303 billion (adjusting for inflation). No other country has seen anything like it. In Europe, as in the Anglosphere, claims fell when lockdown ended. If we look, not simply at benefits, but at state salaries, too, there are as many people claiming money from the government as supplying it: 28 million in each category. But that does not mean that the sums are in balance. To meet its obligations, the government is borrowing £150 billion a year. At the same time, it is spending £55 billion a year on disability and incapacity benefits – a sum that will rise to £70 billion by the end of this parliament. What went wrong? The baleful one-word answer, as so often, is 'lockdown'. The pandemic brutally exposed the inadequacies of the British state, its poor analysis, its safetyism, its authoritarian tendencies. But the government turned out to be good at one thing, namely giving money to people. A lot of workers who had never before been in contact with the benefits system learnt how easy it was to make claims. Some began to see work as a lifestyle choice. At the same time, face-to-face benefits interviews were replaced by telephone assessments, where claimants find it much easier to lie. This was supposed to be a temporary measure but, across the civil service, officials have continued to work from home and, five years on, over 70 per cent of benefits assessments are being made remotely. Show me the incentive and I'll show you the outcome. The surge in long-term benefits under Gordon Brown was tackled after 2010 by a combination of benefits caps and tax cuts. When work paid more, more people worked. This time, though, taxes and unemployment are rising, creating very different incentives. Meanwhile, as predicted in this column, figures now confirm that the economy shrank in the last quarter. In the dry language of the Office for Budget Responsibility, the government 'cannot afford the array of promises that it has made to the public'. Is anyone proposing to do anything about it? Actually, yes. Kemi Badenoch made a thoughtful and serious speech on Thursday explaining how she planned to cut the bills, including bringing the legal definition of disability into line with what most of us understand by the word, and ending claims by foreign nationals, which currently cost a billion pounds a month. The rise of Reform means that the Conservatives have little option but to position themselves as the only party that stands for fiscal responsibility, enterprise and limited government. Although that position may attract less than 50 per cent of the electorate, it attracts more than the 18 per cent that the Tories are currently polling. In any case, it is the right thing to do. Labour's inability to slow, let alone halt, the rise in bills is dooming Britain to a full-scale budgetary and currency crisis. The Conservatives need to provide the diagnosis now so that, when the crash happens, the electorate is ready to gulp down its medicine.
BBC News
an hour ago
- BBC News
Gwynedd man, 25, dies in Malta balcony fall
A 25-year-old man from Gwynedd has died in Malta in a fall from a hotel were called to the hotel in St Julian's, a town on the east of the island, in the early hours of Friday.A medical team attended the scene at Triq Spinola but the man died at the scene. Malta Police said its investigations were of the Senedd Sian Gwenllian, who represents Arfon, said in a statement that the man's death was "truly devastating"."The pain his family must be experiencing is unimaginable. My thoughts, and those of the people of Gwynedd, are with them in their grief," she said.
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Too hot for some! Sunworshippers trade blows in Bournemouth beach brawl as bouncers struggle to contain the violence
Stunned sun-seekers looked on in horror as a mass brawl between a group of topless lads sparked mayhem on one of Britain's busiest beaches. The chaos reportedly erupted on Friday evening on the stretch of coastline next to Bournemouth Pier. Almost a dozen people clashed on the sand as tempers boiled over and the mercury approached a sweltering 30C. Captured by a sunworshipper, the brawling beach-goers were filmed stumbling and swinging wildly at one another as they came to blows. But the fight appeared to turn into a farce as the battling gaggle of men struggled to keep on their feet as they chased around after each other, throwing haymakers. People laughed as one man charged at another male, bumping into him before his opponent wobbles, loses his balance and toppled to the floor. The melee continues, with another man seen stumbling around before then getting shoved unceremoniously to the floor. As he gets up, another is seen to throw a wild hooking-style punch behind him - which fails to connect with anything and sends the man tumbling to the send. Meanwhile, two bouncers are filmed desperately struggling to contain the mayhem. The fight is the latest flashpoint of anti-social carnage to ignite on the beach in recent days. Earlier this week, Dorest Police released CCTV footage of 12 men they were hunting to identify following a beach brawl between topless youths. The incident again took place near the coastal resort's pier, just before 7.30pm on June 30. Footage posted online showed shirtless yobs fighting among themselves and clashing with cops, with some seen hurling objects and attacking them with bottles. Missiles appeared to be thrown at police and glass could be heard smashing on the ground as terrified daytrippers watched on in horror. Five police officers were injured during the chaos, as well as a teenage girl who was taken to hospital for treatment. Their injuries were not serious. A man, 22, from Newbury, Berkshire, who was previously arrested on suspicion of assault by beating of an emergency worker was released on bail as enquiries continue. Another man, 18, from Hackney, east London, was later arrested on suspicion of assault, affray and assault by beating of an emergency worker and remains in custody. The fight sparked a new anti-social behaviour crackdown, which comes into effect this weekend in Bournemouth. It comes as temperatures are set to skyrocket to more than 30C. Anyone who gets a bit too merry on the coastal stretch faces being slapped with fines, and having their alcohol seized. Dorset Police has revealed it is deploying extra patrols around Bournemouth seafront this weekend, as thousands are expected to descend on the sandy beach. Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole (BCP) Council and Dorset Police have revealed they plan to use a range of measures to prevent the violence from happening again. Chief Superintendent Heather Dixey said: 'Violence and disorder on Bournemouth beach will absolutely not be tolerated and anyone who is identified as being involved will be robustly dealt with.' As well as seizing alcohol, police will take away nitrous oxide and other illegal substances from beach-goers causing trouble. Officers will also ask disruptive sun-seekers to leave the beach, where necessary. A public space protection order has been put in place for the coastline from Sandbanks to Highcliffe, and gives police the power to deal with yobs who are aggressive, urinate in public, swear, play loud music or light a BBQ between 7am and 6pm. MailOnline has approached Dorset Police for comment about the brawl on Friday.
