![]() The appeal judges said that the family had a real prospect of proving the allegations, overturning the decision of the High Court. "There is, to my mind, a public interest in allowing this aspect of the claim against the police to proceed," said Sir Anthony. In civil proceedings, the defendant must prove that the mistake was reasonable. ![]() Sir Anthony said that he thought it was in the public interest for the case to be tested in the civil courts.Ī criminal prosecution must disprove the shooting was an honest mistake - its reasonableness was irrelevant. His application to appeal the ruling to the House of Lords was refused. "The effect of this court?s order is that there will be a murder trial which could result in a declaration of unlawful killing." "The self defence issue is a point of great constitutional importance," warned Mr Faulks. Sir Anthony ordered that any trial over misfeasance should wait until after the amount of damages has been settled.Įdward Faulks QC, who represented the police during the hearing, told the judges that the trial would set important and troubling legal precedents. The amount of compensation for the family is to be set at the same time as the trial over assault and battery, which relates to the shooting. The Chief Constable has already admitted negligence in the shooting claim. The family claims that the officers concerned, and in particular Chief Constable Paul Whitehouse who retired in 2001, deliberately released incorrect information to the Press and public, obstructed an independent investigation, failed to involve the Ashley family and fabricated evidence in circumstances in which they knew that what they were doing was unlawful. Misfeasant conduct is conduct by a public officer intending to damage someone, or knowing that or being reckless as to whether he is acting unlawfully and that he might injure someone. The Ashley family also claims misfeasance and negligence, arising out of the conduct of the police after the shooting. Police must now show that PC Sherwood, who has been acquitted in a criminal trial of murder, acted in self defence or a declaration could be made of unlawful killing. Some of these claims arise out of the shooting itself - for assault and battery, false imprisonment and negligence. ![]() James?s father and son are bringing civil claims against the Chief Constable. When his door was forced open, Ashley got up from the bed he was sharing with his girlfriend and went towards the door. Sussex police had a warrant to search his flat in a drugs operation. ![]() James Ashley was 39 when he was killed during a police raid on his flat in St Leonards, East Sussex, in the early hours of January 1998. The Appeal Court has also given permission for allegations of wrongful conduct in office by the chief constable of Sussex after the shooting to go to trial. Three Court of Appeal judges headed by the Master of the Rolls, Sir Anthony Clarke, ruled that there should be a civil trial on the issue of whether the police marksman, PC Chris Sherwood, was guilty of assault and battery when he shot James Ashley. The family of a man shot dead by Sussex Police while naked in his own flat has been given permission to sue the force for unlawful killing. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |