Court of Appeal Upholds Compensation for Man Tasered by Police

The Court of Appeal has denied an application from the City of London Police seeking to appeal a previous court ruling, which mandates the force to pay £24,000 in compensation to a social worker who was Tasered by one of its officers. Edwin Afriyie, 37, stated that he sustained head, back, and leg injuries after falling backward onto the ground and hitting his head on a stone ledge in King William Street in April 2018. Last year, a High Court trial concluded that the Taser’s deployment was reasonable under the circumstances. However, on 25 October, the Court of Appeal determined that it was not “objectively reasonable” and that damages should be awarded. The City of London Police’s application for appeal was rejected on 19 November. In its appeal application, submitted on 31 October, the force asserted that the judgment “threatens the effective lawful use of Tasers by the police in circumstances where they fear imminent violence against themselves or others”. Mr Afriyie remarked that the Court of Appeal’s decision represented a “step towards closure”. He stated, “This decision provides critical validation for myself and my family after nearly seven years of emotional heartache and legal struggles.” He added, “I am grateful to the judiciary for their clarity and resolve in rejecting this appeal. Their decision sends a powerful message about the importance of accountability and justice, both for those directly affected and for the public at large.” Mr Afriyie was initially stopped by police on suspicion of driving at excessive speed and was subsequently detained for failing to provide a breath sample. He was charged with failure to provide a specimen for analysis but was not convicted of the driving offence. The High Court heard testimony that Mr Afriyie was standing with his arms folded, conversing with a friend, when he was Tasered. Judge Mrs Justice Hill concluded that the use of the firearm was reasonable in the circumstances. However, in a Court of Appeal ruling, Lord Justice Davis, sitting with the Lady Chief Justice Baroness Carr and Lord Justice Dingemans, declared: “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.” The City of London Police was contacted for comment.