Jury deliberate on Sussex police officers use of force on amputee
Judge Christopher Hehir, summarising the evidence on at Southwark Crown Court on Wednesday, told jurors: "The reason for his behaviour that day, we now know, is that he was delirious as a result of a urinary tract infection."PC Smith sprayed synthetic Pava pepper spray into Mr Burgess's face and struck his wrist with a baton, with PC Comotto deploying her Taser, all within a minute and 23 seconds of entering the pensioner's room, the court was told.PC Smith denies two counts of assault occasioning actual bodily harm for his use of Pava spray and for using a baton, while PC Comotto denies one count related to her use of a Taser on Mr Burgess.Judge Hehirsaid jurors should reach their decision "with their heads, not their hearts".
Prosecutors claim the force used against Mr Burgess, who had been reportedly waving a serrated cutlery knife around and telling staff he would "take pleasure" in murdering them, was "unjustified and unlawful" given his age and physical condition.PC Smith previously told jurors he did not see that Mr Burgess was disabled and using a wheelchair as he was focused on the knife the pensioner was holding in his hand.During his evidence, he denied emptying a full can of Pava in Mr Burgess's face, saying it was "a short burst".He also denied hitting Mr Burgess with a baton, claiming he instead flicked the baton towards the pensioner's wrist to "knock the knife out" of his hand.During her evidence, PC Comotto said she believed using the Taser was the safest way to "protect" Mr Burgess as she feared her colleague using the baton again would cause more harm."I'm not a trigger-happy officer," she told jurors."It's the first time I've fired my Taser."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BreakingNews.ie
21 minutes ago
- BreakingNews.ie
Diane Abbott advised Jeremy Corbyn against founding new party, event told
Diane Abbott advised Jeremy Corbyn against setting up a new political party, she said, over concerns it would struggle to get a foothold in Britain because of the voting system. Ms Abbott, who served as Mr Corbyn's shadow home secretary when he was Labour leader, said she had spoken to him before its launch, and said it was not a good idea. Advertisement Speaking at an event at the Edinburgh Book Festival, the current longest-serving female MP said: 'There were people around Jeremy encouraging him to set up a new party, and I told him not to. 'It's very difficult under first-past-the-post system for a new party to absolutely win. If it wasn't first-past-the-post, then you can see how a new party could come through, but I understand why he did it.' Ms Abbott said she thought the party, formed by her long-time friend Independent MP Mr Corbyn (Islington North) alongside Independent MP Zarah Sultana (Coventry South), would outperform people's expectations. It was launched last month, but is still without a formal name. She said she believed it would take advantage of a broader discontent with politics in Britain. Advertisement Former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn and then-shadow home secretary Diane Abbott during a visit to Finsbury Park Mosque in 2019 (Victoria Jones/PA She paid tribute to Mr Corbyn and Ms Sultana but said: 'At this point in time, it's difficult to see how a brand new party wins. 'However, I think Jeremy's party is going to do a lot better than people think because a lot of people who are not necessarily terribly left-wing people, are a tiny bit disappointed about the way we've gone in the past year.' The MP for Hackney North and Stoke Newington indicated her disappointment with the Labour Government. She had the whip withdrawn for the second time in two years in July, after she expressed a lack of regret about comments to the Observer in 2023 that suggested that Jewish, Irish and Traveller people experience prejudice, but not racism. Advertisement However, she implied she would not join Mr Corbyn's party. Ms Abbott said: 'It's a tricky state of play. I wouldn't have thought that you'd have a Labour Government and they'd be cutting winter fuel allowance for the elderly and benefits for the disabled.' She was also critical of the Government's proscription of Palestine Action and labelled the decision 'a complete disgrace'. Diane Abbott in 1986 when she was Hackney North and Stoke Newington Labour election candidate. Photo: PA. 'What they are seeking to do is proscribe protest as such,' she said. 'I mean, we all saw the pictures of the people in Trafalgar Square – 500 people? Half of them over 60. Come on, these are terrorists? I think this is an attempt to bear down on (protest).' Advertisement She added her more than 40 years in Labour meant it was too late to leave it. She was elected to Parliament in 1987, and was the only black female MP in the Commons for a decade until Labour's landslide under Tony Blair. In response to a question about whether she thought she would ever be accepted 'at the heart' of the Labour Party, she replied: 'I think I am at the heart of the Labour Party, it's other people who aren't.' Ms Abbott, whose book A Woman Like Me, was the subject of the interview in the Scottish capital by campaigner Talat Yaqoob, also told the audience of her anger at not being called by Commons speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle in the aftermath of racist comments by Conservative Party donor Frank Hester in 2024. She said she had stood during a Prime Minister's Question session more than 40 times to be called to speak, after Sir Keir Starmer, Rishi Sunak and Sir Ed Davey had all spoken about the incident. Advertisement Mr Hester was reported to have said Ms Abbott made him want to 'hate all black women' and that she 'should be shot'. The remarks brought widespread condemnation, including from Sir Keir, but she told the event her office was used to receiving racist abuse. 'I've been an MP for 38 years, and custom practice in the chamber is if you're being talked about, you get called. It's just a courtesy. I was so shocked that I wasn't called. 'But I heard later from someone who had reason to know, that what happened was that Rishi didn't want me called, because (Hester) was a Tory donor and it would look bad for them, and I'm afraid Keir Starmer didn't want me called because he wanted to milk the issue (for) political advantage, without mentioning me.' She said Sir Keir had approached her after the questions session and asked what he could do to help. 'I said, 'Yes, you can restore the whip'. And as if he hadn't heard, he said, 'Is there anything I can do for you?' It was like he was deaf. And I said, 'Yes, you can restore the whip', and he realised I wasn't going to play that game and he went off.'
Telegraph
21 minutes ago
- Telegraph
My ADHD made me sleep in sauna on work trip, says sacked female exec
A drunk female executive who claimed she was sacked for spending the night in a hotel sauna during a work trip was discriminated against over her ADHD, a tribunal has ruled. Shannon Burns said her condition made her experience a 'great deal of forgetfulness' which resulted in her spending the night outside her suite when she misplaced her room key. The engineer, who was on £220,000 a year, was dismissed for her behaviour at the off-site event in Austria in April 2023 despite her claims that male colleagues were 'far more intoxicated' than her and faced no punishment. She was told her antics had 'eroded trust and confidence' in her and that she should 'lead the team by example' as a senior employee at the software company. Ms Burns, an American, is now in line for compensation after successfully suing for discrimination with a judge ruling that she experienced a 'great deal of forgetfulness' as a result of her ADHD. Employment Judge Rachel Wedderspoon said that while Ms Burns had been intoxicated, being 'disorganised' is a feature of the condition and contributed to her misplacing her keys that evening. The tribunal heard Ms Burns was headhunted for a senior role at Gitpod, which she took with the promise of a six-figure salary plus an equity package potentially worth more than £30 million. 'Tech bro' culture She claimed she was the victim of sex discrimination and complained of the rampant 'tech bro' culture at the 'male-dominated' firm that hired her. But the judge rejected this and said that her dismissal had nothing to do with her gender and was instead down to the fact that she displayed 'a lack of professionalism'. The employment tribunal, held in Birmingham, was told that Ms Burns, who has dyslexia, was diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder in 2015. It was heard that the condition caused her to experience a 'great deal of forgetfulness' and she would 'persistently' lose items such as her keys and phone. 'Disorganised and forgetful' Upholding her disability discrimination claims, Judge Wedderspoon said: '[Ms Burns] had consumed quite a lot of alcohol on one night of the offsite when she got locked out of her room. 'However, being disorganised and forgetful may be features of ADHD. 'The tribunal found that losing her keys on the first occasion and being locked out was likely to be something arising from her forgetfulness, a feature of [Ms Burns'] ADHD. 'However, drinking alcohol is likely to have played a part of being locked out later in the evening... 'Insofar as [Ms Burns] was criticised for being locked out in the evening the tribunal finds that this was likely in part to be as a result of the combination of her alcohol consumption and her forgetfulness which is something arising from her disability of ADHD.' Her claims of sex discrimination were dismissed and the judge said Ms Burns was not dismissed for being drunk and was instead sacked 'in part for her behaviours by reason of being drunk'. The judge added: 'She displayed a lack of professionalism namely lack of executive presence as a vice-president. That had nothing whatsoever to do with the fact that [Ms Burns] is a woman.'
The Guardian
21 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Pro-Israel lawyers investigated over alleged legal threats to suppress support for Palestine
An organisation of pro-Israel lawyers in the UK is under investigation by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) after a complaint that it has threatened people with legal action in order to suppress support for Palestine. UK Lawyers for Israel (UKLFI) has been accused of sending eight letters to individuals and organisations between January 2022 and May 2025 that 'demonstrate a seeming pattern of vexatious and legally baseless correspondence aimed at silencing and intimidating Palestine solidarity efforts', according to the complainants. The complaint was lodged with the SRA by the Public Interest Law Centre (PILC) and the European Legal Support Center. They allege 'serious breaches' of the SRA's principles and code of conduct. A spokesperson for the SRA said: 'We have had a complaint and are investigating before deciding on next steps.' UKLFI was formed in 2011 to use its members' legal skills 'to combat BDS [Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions] and the delegitimisation of Israel'. Its website says: 'We employ advocacy, legal research and campaigning to support Israel, Israeli organisations, Israelis, and/or supporters of Israel against BDS and other attempts to undermine, attack or delegitimise them.' According to the complaint, UKLFI uses 'strategic lawsuits against public participation (Slapps), which are lawsuits intended to limit freedom of expression on matters of public interest'. One of the letters included in the complaint was sent by Caroline Turner, a director of UKLFI, to the Scottish Storytelling Centre, an arts centre in Edinburgh, that had announced plans to host a Palestinian film festival in May in partnership with Traditional Arts and Culture Scotland. According to the complaint, UKLFI's letter claimed the scheduled events were 'inherently antisemitic and anti-Zionist in nature' and could lead to a referral to the Scottish charity regulator. UKLFI requested the festival's cancellation. Another letter was sent by Turner on behalf of UKLFI to the Cornelius Cardew Concerts Trust which had organised a classical music concert called The World Stands With Palestine at a London college in November 2024. The concert was to feature new music written 'in response to the struggle of the Palestinian people'. Flyers advertising the concert included an image of a placard reading: 'Stand with Palestine!! Stand with the Resistance!!'. According to the complaint, UKLFI's letter said the concert was 'siding with the viewpoint' of Hamas and was likely to be in breach of the Terrorism Act 2000. It appeared to be 'designed to stir up racial hatred against Jews and Israelis, and to sympathise with the aims of the Hamas terrorist organisation'. The concert was cancelled by the college that was due to host the event. Paul Heron, the founder of PILC, said: 'UKLFI are acting in a manner that chills public participation and intimidates those who stand in solidarity with Palestine … We will not allow legal threats to shut down the public's right to speak out on Palestine. The SRA has a duty to step in, to uphold professional standards, and to protect civil society from intimidation dressed up as law.' The SRA's website describes Slapps as a 'type of abusive litigation' that can 'undermine freedom of expression, the rule of law and amount to a misuse of the legal system'. In a statement published on its website, UKLFI said the allegations against it were unfounded. It said: 'We are accused of writing vexatious and baseless letters, and the complainants say they have acquired eight examples from a period of over three years.' It added that since October 2023 UKLFI had been called on to address 'hundreds of requests for help every year from Jewish members of the public expressing genuine concerns in many areas of life including medical services, retailers, education and the arts'. 'Many of the concerns relate to conduct creating an intimidating, hostile and offensive environment for Jewish patients, workers, customers or students, and sometimes excluding them altogether. 'If appropriate, we write to the relevant organisation and point out what is happening, the effect that this has had on the Jewish or Israeli customer or patient, and how applicable laws or regulatory requirements are being breached. We also explain how the problem may be solved.'
