Police officers detained after smacking son win appeal after ‘unlawful’ arrests
Two married police officers who were arrested after the Supreme Court won the war with allegations that their young sons were illegally detained.
Both of the officers working with the metropolitan police, his wife, after the wrong to behave wrongly after giving what he described as “a slightly on the left cheek” after giving what he described by Surrey police in March 2019 was arrested.
After the Surrey police were told that they would not encounter any other action, they filed a lawsuit and claimed that it was illegal because it was unnecessary to detain.
The couple, who had three children, rejected their allegations after a hearing last year and appealed against the decision of the Supreme Court at the beginning of this month.
In a decision on Monday, Mr. Justice Bourne overturned the decision.
He said: “In my trial, upon the appropriate analysis of the evidence in the hearing, the police did not show that there was an objective basis to believe that it was necessary to arrest both plaintiffs.”
In a 30 -page decision, the judge said that the couple, called the US during the incident, had a unfortunate history of challenging behaviors ve and started to join a youth center to access mental health services.
The couple canceled the US birthday party in March 2019 after being wrong and caused him to go to his room and “something kick”.
This led to his mother to throw his son while sleeping while his father was asleep, which was not difficult and did not cause any injury or left any traces. ”
The United States joined the Youth Center the next day and said that he was attacked by his mother by his mother and that his father did nothing to stop it.
Despite the voluntary meeting, both parents were arrested for more than seven hours and detained.
The United States returned to the family home the next day, thought that the police said that children were not at risk of harm and that they would not encounter any other action three days after their double arrest.
Following a five -day hearing at the Guildford District Court, a judge rejected the legal claims and found that the police believed that their arrests were necessary to protect a child or children from the person and to provide a quick and effective investigation ”.
The judge also ordered the couple to pay 70 percent of the legal costs of power.
At a hearing in London on July 2, double lawyers found that the arrests were “objectively reasonable” because both parents offer voluntary interviews and said that they were “postponed”.
In his decision, Justice Bourne said that the judicial judge could not “accept” that civil servants were a “rational foundation” to conclude that voluntary talks are not an option.
He said: “There was no reason in the current case that explains why voluntary talks were not an applicable alternative.”
“None of this means that police officers have the right to treat themselves when they find themselves suspected of a crime.
“However, the police should evaluate the conditions and make rational decisions as to whether or not challenging measures are required.”
“It was not enough to refer to the need for protecting children and protecting the integrity of the investigation, and it was not enough.
“He follows that the arrests are illegal and that the allegations should be successful.”
