City of London Police Challenges Compensation Order for Tasered Individual

The City of London Police intends to challenge a court decision mandating it to pay £24,000 in damages to a social worker who was subjected to a Taser by an officer from the force. Edwin Afriyie, aged 37, reported sustaining injuries to his head, back, and legs subsequent to falling backward onto the ground and striking his head on a stone ledge on King William Street in April 2018. While a High Court trial conducted last year determined that the Taser’s deployment was reasonable given the situation, the Court of Appeal concluded on 25 October that it was not “objectively reasonable” and that compensation ought to be granted. On 31 October, the City of London Police filed an application for appeal, asserting that the judgment was “likely to have a chilling effect on front-line police officers”. The force’s appeal submission stated that the ruling “threatens the effective lawful use of Tasers by the police in circumstances where they fear imminent violence against themselves or others”. The police force contended that the Court of Appeal disregarded the High Court judge’s conclusion that the officer had used the Taser out of concern that Mr Afriyie might “aggressively resist or attack the officers”. Police officers stopped Mr Afriyie due to suspected excessive speeding, and he was subsequently taken into custody for not providing a breath sample. Although he faced charges for failing to provide a specimen for analysis, he was not found guilty of the driving infraction. Mr Afriyie expressed being “profoundly disappointed” by the City of London Police’s decision to pursue an appeal. He stated, “This decision demonstrates a troubling lack of accountability and a continued misuse of public funds, which have already reached approximately £500,000 of taxpayers’ money just to bring the case to this point.” He added, “Beyond the financial implications, this appeal is prolonging the emotional toll on myself and my loved ones, denying us closure after what has been an incredibly traumatic experience.” During the High Court proceedings, it was revealed that Mr Afriyie was standing with his arms folded, engaged in conversation with a friend, at the moment he was Tasered. Judge Mrs Justice Hill concluded that the deployment of the firearm was reasonable under the prevailing circumstances. However, in a Court of Appeal judgment, Lord Justice Davis, presiding alongside Lady Chief Justice Baroness Carr and Lord Justice Dingemans, remarked: “A proper objective analysis of whether using a weapon classified as a firearm was reasonable would have led the judge to conclude that it was not.” He further stated: “Her conclusion that further negotiation would have been futile did not amount to the necessary analysis of objective reasonableness of the nature and degree of force used.”