Two married Metropolitan Police officers, arrested following an incident in which one struck their young teenage son, have prevailed in a High Court case on allegations of arbitrary detention.
Two officers from the Metropolitan Police were apprehended by Surrey Police in March 2019 after the mother administered what she characterised as a “light smack on the left cheek” to her son for misbehaviour.
They initiated legal action against Surrey Police after being informed that no further action would be taken, asserting that their imprisonment was unlawful due to its needless nature.
The Metropolitan Police couple, parents of three children, had their claims rejected after a trial last year and subsequently challenged the verdict at the High Court earlier this month.
On Monday, Mr. Justice Bourne annulled the decision.
He said: “In my judgment, on a proper analysis of the evidence at trial, the police did not show that there was an objective basis for the belief that it was necessary to arrest either claimant.”
The judge said in a 30-page ruling that at the time of the incident, the couple’s son, referred to as ABD, had “an unfortunate history of challenging behaviour” and had begun attending a youth centre to access mental health services.
The couple cancelled ABD’s birthday party in March 2019 after he misbehaved, causing him to go to his room, where he “kicked things around”.
This led his mother to smack her son while his father was asleep, which she said “was not hard and did not cause any injury or leave any mark”.
ABD attended a youth centre the following day and told staff that he had been assaulted by his mother and that his father had done nothing to stop it.
Despite offering to be interviewed voluntarily, both parents were arrested and detained for more than seven hours.
ABD returned to the family home the following day, with police deeming that the children were not at risk of harm and telling the couple that they would face no further action three days after their arrest.
In his ruling, Mr Justice Bourne said he was “unable to agree” with the trial judge’s finding that there was a “rational basis” for officers to conclude that voluntary interviews were not an option.
He said: “In the present case, no reason has been identified which actually explains why voluntary interviews were not a viable alternative.
“It follows that the arrests were unlawful and the claims should have succeeded.”
If you or anyone you know have been affected by the people highlighted in this website, then please report those individuals to the Police on 101 (999 if an emergency) or visit their online resources for further details of the options for reporting a crime. You can also make a report at Crimestoppers should you wish to be completely anonymous. There is help available on our support links page.