Our client was arrested on 27th May 2020 on suspicion of a murder occurring on 22nd October 2018.
During his interview it was unclear what grounds for suspicion existed, although it appeared to be something to do with his motorbike, which he had reported stolen approximately 2 weeks prior to his arrest (and therefore approximately 18 months after the murder).
He was detained for a period of 12 hours.
On 4th August 2020 a letter notifying our client that the police had decided to take no further action against him was generated. Our client did not receive any such letter and remained of the belief that he was a suspect in a live murder investigation until he finally learnt of the NFA decision when arrested on unrelated matters on 16th March 2021.
Property seized by police following our client’s arrest was not returned to him until various IT items were returned on 21st April 2021 and the remaining items not until 18th August 2021.
Our client lodged a formal police complaint, which investigation was not able to determine whether the NFA letter dated 4th August 2020 was actually posted to our client, concluding “on the balance of probabilities” that it was, without securing the recollection of any particular officer / employee that they had sent it.
His complaint was upheld with regard to police unlawful retention of his property long after the NFA decision was made.
We then threatened legal action for false imprisonment, assault, trespass to goods and breach of article 8 ECHR (in respect of the failure to inform him that the matter had been NFA’d). The Met denied liability and refused to disclose the basis for the arrest on the grounds that this may undermine a live investigation. We issued proceedings not least because in a civil claim for false imprisonment, once the Claimant has proved that they were detained, it is for the Defendant to prove that they were detained lawfully.
Once proceedings were issued the Met filed a defence giving some limited details of the grounds for the arrest to the effect that the arrest had followed “intelligence” from a 3rd party.
We have settled at £5k for our client, good news for him and a news story which the Islington Gazette found worthy of a write up.
Client review
After the case the clients partner left this review for Duncan Burtwell on Google Reviews
Very greatful of Duncan professional approach, listened and advised, shoed me he cared what happened to me, which really appreciated because at times I suffered mentally from being wrongfully arrested. Duncan to became more than just a solicitor but a friend that I could chat to on how was feeling. Thank you so much.
