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/2017/aug/23/man-caught-with-pipe-bomb-at-manchester-airport-jailed-nadeem-muhammad
The article has changed 6 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| Man caught with pipe bomb at Manchester airport jailed | Man caught with pipe bomb at Manchester airport jailed |
| (35 minutes later) | |
| A man who tried to smuggle a pipe bomb onboard a flight from Manchester to Italy has been sentenced to 18 years in jail. | |
| Nadeem Muhammad, 43, was was found to be carrying the “crude explosive device” when he was searched as he tried to board a flight to Bergamo on 30 January. Security officers found the bomb, made from batteries, tape, a marker pen and pins, in the zip lining of a small green suitcase he was carrying. | |
| Sentencing him, the judge, Patrick Field QC, said that the court had heard no evidence of a motive – whether political, religious or terrorist – but that Muhammad’s actions had shown an intention to cause harm to life and therefore deserved a long prison sentence. | |
| During the trial at Manchester crown court, the jury heard that Muhammad, who was born in Pakistan but had an Italian passport, had intended to detonate the device on the Ryanair flight. | |
| Airport security swabbed the confiscated device but found no trace of explosives, so concluded it was not dangerous. Muhammad was questioned by police and said the device could have been put into his bag by somebody else, possibly his wife. | |
| He missed his flight, but was not arrested, and was able to board another flight to Italy a few days later on 5 February. On 8 February, when the device was examined again, suspicions were raised and a bomb squad called. | |
| Explosives experts found it was a “crude but potentially viable improvised explosive device” containing nitroglycerin and nitrocellulose. Muhammad was arrested when he returned to the UK on 12 February. | |
| Muhammad, who claims to have had no knowledge of the device, wept in the dock as the majority verdict of 10 to two was read to the court earlier this month. | |
| Following the sentencing, Judge Field criticised airport security for making the “wholly erroneous and potentially dangerous” decision that the bomb was not viable. He said he was unlikely to be the only one to have been alarmed by some of the evidence in the trial and that he hoped security and policing at the airport would be reviewed at the highest level. | |
| Speaking following the sentencing, ACC Russ Jackson, responsible for the North West Counter Terrorism Unit, said: “As the judge indicated today, this could have caused ‘not inconsiderable damage’ to property and injury to people close to the device. | |
| “We cannot be certain what risk this device presented and may never know Muhammad’s intentions unless he decides to tell us. I want to be clear that we accept there were errors made in the assessment of this item. | |
| “Our debriefs of staff have shown that Muhammad’s explanation, his demeanour when stopped, the absence of any concern in background checks and the actual initial assessment of the device, certainly led to the view at the time that this was not a suspicious incident. | |
| “This was wrong and when the true nature of the item became clear, immediate steps were taken to arrest Muhammad and he has been successfully prosecuted and today sentenced to 18 years in prison.” | |
| The court heard that the device – which consisted of three AAA batteries, the shell of a marker pen containing just under 10 grams of gunpowder, and dressmaker’s pins – could have caused harm to people in its immediate vicinity, but that it posed the greatest risk to the person detonating it. | |
| “What should be made clear is that airport security screening was effective and the device found,” said Jackson. “I also want to explain that both airport and police have reviewed our security procedures to ensure that proper operating procedures are followed on every occasion where there is a suspicious incident. | |
| “This is an extremely serious incident at a time when people are concerned about terrorism, especially here in Manchester and whilst it should be acknowledged that the security checks were effective in finding the item, the assessment of the device should have been more comprehensive and taken place sooner. | |
| “These lessons have been learned and reviews of operating procedures have already taken place.” |