Gilchrist v Greater Manchester Police [2019] EWHC 1233 (QB)

Police use of force "I recognise that this was a challenging situation for the police officers. They were faced with an individual who presented as very angry, covered in blood and with whom they were unable to communicate. Prior to Andrew Gilchrist's explanation, their assumption that Michael Gilchrist was an aggressor who, probably, had assaulted someone and needed to be detained, was reasonable. In those circumstances, their initial actions to attempt to bring him under control using CS gas and Taser were justified, reasonable and proportionate. However, once they were appraised of his vulnerability as an autistic man, and his behaviour suggested that he was defensive rather than aggressive, a more cautious approach should have been adopted. The further use of Taser, which had already proved to be ineffective, and following the use of CS gas, was inappropriate. The alternative course mandated by PS Morris, namely, using the force of the officers available to take Mr Gilchrist to the ground and restrain him without using weapons was a reasonable and proportionate response."

CASES DATABASE

Full judgment: BAILII!

Subject(s):

Date: 15/5/19🔍

Court: High Court (Queen's Bench Division)🔍

Judge(s):

Parties:

  • Michael Gilchrist🔍
  • Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police🔍

Citation number(s):

What links here:

Published: 20/5/19

Cached: 2019-06-25 08:51:51