Billy Elliot ballet star mistaken for terrorist by police wins £600k compensation
A. Billy Elliot A ballet star who was mistaken for a terrorist and branded by a Met police officer has won her case for up to £600,000 in damages.
Alexander Loxton, who played ‘Older Billy’ in the popular West End musical, suffered a career-devastating ankle ligament injury during a Met Police stop-and-frisk in September 2016, ending his ambitions for ‘Premier League’ ballet.
He had gone to a London police station hoping to recover his stolen helmet visor and motorbike, but after being mistaken for a “terrorist” or thief, he was subjected to “unreasonable force” after a police officer stomped on him during the search.
The Met denied the force used was excessive, but following a hearing at Central London District Court a judge ruled that Mr Loxton, 36, was entitled to compensation of up to around £600,000, to be assessed at a later date.
Judge David Saunders said the lead constable “significantly overreacted” during the stop-and-search and was “too hasty in drawing conclusions”.
The court heard that in his youth Mr Loxton studied classical ballet at the prestigious Royal Ballet Upper School, where his “dedication, talent and talent” were praised.
At the time of his arrest, he had just begun a promising career, appearing in TV and film roles alongside Keira Knightley and Helen Mirren in Disney, taking on the role of Old Billy at London’s Victoria Palace Theatre. Nutcracker and as Peter Rabbit at the Queen’s 80th birthday garden party.
Mr Loxton said the catastrophic ankle injury occurred in September 2016 when he went to Kennington Police Station to collect a stolen skirt visor and decided to “by chance” see if a motor scooter, which had also been stolen, was kept in a secure area behind the building.
Mr Loxton’s barrister Fiona Murphy KC told the court he was confronted by a group of officers there.
KC said a police car was reversed towards him, Mr Loxton grabbed his left arm and tried to force him from behind, before asking one of the officers to come out and identify himself.
“Mr. Loxton became tense. The officer failed to gain control of the plaintiff’s left arm. While pulling on the plaintiff’s left arm, he repeatedly struck the plaintiff’s left foot with his foot.
“The officer pushed and pulled the plaintiff while pinching his left foot.”
Ms. Murphy said the officer, leaning against a wall, “continued to search for the plaintiff and, while doing so, repeatedly struck Mr. Loxton’s ankle with his foot.”
The incident left Mr Loxton with permanent injuries to the ligaments in his ankle, while he also complained of feelings of “distress, anxiety, embarrassment, humiliation and humiliation” and soft tissue injuries to his thumb, wrist and fingers.
Ms Murphy said before the incident Mr Loxton was thought to have the talent and determination to succeed in “major league ballet companies” or the West End music and film industries.
But despite intense rehabilitation efforts, her “permanent and career-ending” injuries meant she was unable to cope with the high-pressure ballet practice.
“He was and still is unable to tolerate the full repertoire of dance manoeuvres, and has particular difficulties in jumping, changing direction and landing,” he said.
Defending the allegations against him, the Met denied that any force used was disproportionate and the lead police officer at the incident claimed Mr Loxton was “very aggressive and extremely evasive”.
The police officer said in evidence that he had previously been seen “brazenly staring at the garden” where bicycles had been stolen and that the officer suspected Mr Loxton was “there either to enter the police garden or to carry out a terrorist-related activity” at a time when the terrorist threat was considered “serious”.
When Mr Loxton refused to provide any identification and began to walk away, the officer decided to stop and search him and asked for help in restraining and handcuffing two of his colleagues.
Police insisted that the dancer never stomped her left foot; he placed his right foot only to hold it in place as Mr. Loxton struggled repeatedly while being searched.
But giving his verdict, Judge Saunders said he preferred the former dancer’s evidence and also rejected the Met’s claims that Mr Loxton was “aggressive and evasive”.
There was no solid reason to suspect Mr Loxton was involved in terrorism or crime, he said, adding that he had already explained his reasons for visiting the police station to another officer.
“This was not a situation where he was being sneaky in any way,” the judge said, adding: “I found it unusual that the officer attempted to reach Mr Loxton before he had been given the chance to explain himself in a situation where he had already explained himself.
“He said, ‘I have to hold him, he was walking away, I had to get him under control.’”
“This is important because, on balance, I have formed the view that he overreacted without considering the consequences of what he was doing.
“In other words, she was too hasty in jumping to conclusions about Mr. Loxton; he had, of course, never been in trouble with the police and was later revealed to be a professional ballerina.”
The judge continued: “In my view, Mr Loxton’s version is to be preferred. The more likely explanation is that the officer overreacted to the situation, other younger and less experienced officers were forced to follow him, resulting in Mr Loxton being injured in a very violent incident that was disproportionate to what actually happened.”
“Taking everything into account, I find that this officer’s use of force was unlawful and resulted from branding or the application of force to the plaintiff’s left foot in accordance with his statement.”
Although the judge acknowledged that the dancer had previously suffered an ankle strain in 2013, he rejected the Met’s argument that the ligament damage in 2016 was an “everyday occurrence” and found that the stamp had caused permanent damage.
She also brushed aside claims that the dancer’s career was “essentially over” during her unwanted run-in with police, deciding that she could still excel in ballet for another nine years before embarking on a successful teaching career.
Just months before the incident, Mr Loxton had been offered “prestigious” stage roles; He was later offered the role of “Slave Master” in Phantom of the Opera and a role in a Disney movie.
The judge said dancing was a lifelong “passion and skill” for Mr Loxton and he was not training for another career.
It awarded him £24,000 in “general compensation”, particularly in relation to his ankle injury, and an interim £10,000 in “aggravated compensation” to reflect the “oppressive and humiliating” impact of his detention.
“I find that the force used was unjustified. Based on my findings above, I consider that the incident must have caused some degree of humiliation – Mr Loxton was handcuffed and pressed against a wall by five officers in full view of anyone passing by.”
But Judge Saunders said he would consider the issue of compensation for Mr Loxton’s loss of his dancing career at a later date, following out-of-court negotiations between both parties.
Mr Loxton claimed damages of around £600,000.
