This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jul/12/student-lawrence-green-police-assault-warwick-ipcc-watchdog-high-court

The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Student launches legal action against IPCC over CS spray incident Student launches legal action against IPCC over CS spray incident
(about 5 hours later)
A student who alleges he was assaulted by police during a tuition fees demonstration has launched legal action against the Independent Police Complaints Commission. A university student who alleges he was assaulted by police during a demonstration has launched legal action against the Independent Police Complaints Commission.
Lawyers for Lawrence Green told the high court on Tuesday that an investigation by the IPCC – the police watchdog – that dismissed his allegations was illogical, hasty and flawed. Lawyers for Lawrence Green told the high court on Tuesday that an investigation by the police watchdog, which dismissed his allegations, was illogical, hasty and flawed.
Green, 26, has alleged that police sprayed CS gas into his face at close range, causing him “excruciating pain” and temporarily blinding him, in contravention of national guidelines. Police sprayed CS gas into Green’s face from close range during the demonstration. Green, 26, has said the spray caused him “excruciating pain” and temporarily blinded him.
He is claiming that the IPCC failed to investigate his allegations independently and fairly. He alleges he was sprayed from a distance of less than a metre, which he says broke national guidelines. He claims that the IPCC failed to investigate his allegations independently and fairly.
The IPCC had started its investigation after he and other students complained about the conduct of police during a protest at Warwick University in December 2014. Green’s barrister, Fiona Murphy, told the court that Green took part in a protest against education cuts at Warwick University in December 2014. She said one of the protesters assaulted a member of the university security staff during a scuffle while they entered the administration building.
Fiona Murphy, Green’s barrister, told the court that he took part in a peaceful protest against education cuts at the university’s administration block. She said one of the protesters assaulted a member of the university security staff during a scuffle while they entered the building.
She said the atmosphere was “demonstrably calm” for about 50 minutes while the protesters discussed the issue of tuition fees until the police arrived.She said the atmosphere was “demonstrably calm” for about 50 minutes while the protesters discussed the issue of tuition fees until the police arrived.
Green, from Milton Keynes, has alleged that “all chaos broke loose as they [police] jumped into the group and started to push people around”. The police were seeking to arrest the protester who was later found guilty of assaulting the university staff member.Green, from Milton Keynes, has alleged that “all chaos broke loose as they [police] jumped into the group and started to push people around”. The police were seeking to arrest the protester who was later found guilty of assaulting the university staff member.
Green saw an officer, PC Simon Lloyd, grab one of his friends “aggressively and pulled her forward and to the ground”, Murphy told the court. Green saw an officer, PC Simon Lloyd, grab one of his friends “aggressively and pull her forward and to the ground”, Murphy told the court.
Green was “shocked and distressed” and remonstrated with Lloyd, who allegedly “jabbed” at his neck and took out his CS spray, according to Murphy. Green was “shocked and distressed” and remonstrated with Lloyd, who allegedly “jabbed” at his neck and took out his CS spray, Murphy said.
Lloyd warned Green to get back but before he could, he sprayed him with CS, leaving him temporarily blinded, she said. Lloyd warned Green to get back but before Green could do so he sprayed him with CS, leaving the student temporarily blinded, she said.
“His left eye and the side of his face felt like he had suffered a chemical burn. His sight returned to normal after about seven days and the discomfort to his skin resolved after an outer layer of skin had peeled off,” she told the deputy high court judge, Robin Purchas. “His left eye and the side of his face felt like he had suffered a chemical burn. His sight returned to normal after about seven days and the discomfort to his skin resolved after an outer layer of skin had peeled off,” she told the deputy high court judge Robin Purchas.
Murphy outlined what she said were a series of errors in the IPCC’s investigation, which cleared the police of wrongdoing. She said the IPCC had “reached conclusions that had no logical connection with the evidence objectively viewed” and had taken into account irrelevant evidence.Murphy outlined what she said were a series of errors in the IPCC’s investigation, which cleared the police of wrongdoing. She said the IPCC had “reached conclusions that had no logical connection with the evidence objectively viewed” and had taken into account irrelevant evidence.
She claimed that the IPCC had failed to analyse properly whether Lloyd had acted reasonably when he sprayed Green with CS and whether he had “advanced a deliberately dishonest account”. She said the IPCC had failed to analyse properly whether Lloyd had acted reasonably when he sprayed Green with CS and whether he had “advanced a deliberately dishonest account”.
The court heard that the IPCC had concluded that no disciplinary or criminal action should be taken against Lloyd, ruling that he had acted properly. Green wants a fresh investigation into his claims. The court heard that the IPCC concluded that no disciplinary or criminal action should be taken against Lloyd, and ruled that he had acted properly. Green wants a fresh investigation into his claims.
The watchdog had decided that “there is no evidence to support the various allegations of assault or possible criminal action or misconduct given the circumstances during a public order incident at which the police officers were considered to provide a reasonable and proportionate justification for their use of force at the time”. The watchdog decided that “there is no evidence to support the various allegations of assault or possible criminal action or misconduct given the circumstances during a public order incident at which the police officers were considered to provide a reasonable and proportionate justification for their use of force at the time”.
The IPCC is opposing the legal action. Emma Dixon, for the IPCC, rejected the criticisms of the watchdog’s investigation, saying it had correctly evaluated the allegations. She said Lloyd had needed to make a swift decision during the demonstration and decided to use CS spray, which did not have a lasting effect on Green.
The court heard that Lloyd had told the IPCC investigators he had acted reasonably and had not broken the guidelines governing the use of CS spray. He told them he had feared he was going to be attacked.
Purchas said he would give his judgment at a later date.