R v William George McKinley
[2023] EWCA Crim 798
Director of Public Prosecutions v Sidney Price & Anor
23 October 2024
[2024] EWHC 2864 (Admin)
High Court
Two people were accused of assaulting police officers. A judge threw out the case because he thought the police needed to prove a crime had happened before they could arrest. A higher court said the judge was wrong; the police only needed to have a reasonable suspicion of a crime. The case now goes back to the first judge to decide again using the correct rules.
Key Facts
- •Sidney Price and Katie Darby were charged with assaulting emergency workers and resisting arrest.
- •Charges were dismissed by District Judge Khanna due to lack of evidence of criminal damage.
- •The DPP appealed by way of case stated.
- •The incident involved a damaged kitchen at Darby's property, a police call from Darby's mother, and Darby's initial statement implicating Price.
- •Police officers used force to enter the property to arrest Price.
- •The District Judge found that the lack of a formal complaint of criminal damage meant there was no lawful basis for the arrest, thus, no lawful entry and officers not acting in their function.
Legal Principles
Power of arrest without warrant if a constable has reasonable grounds to suspect an offence has been committed and that arrest is necessary for reasons in section 24(5) PACE.
Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE), sections 24(2), 24(4), and 24(5)
Power of entry and search for the purpose of arresting a person for an indictable offence (subject to reasonable grounds belief person is on premises).
Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE), section 17(1)(b) and (2)(a)
Reasonable suspicion test is a low bar, lower than a prima facie case; factors considered cumulatively.
Parker v Chief Constable of Essex [2017] EWHC 2140 (QB) and O’Hara v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary [1997] AC 286
For the purposes of the Assaults on Emergency Workers (Offences) Act 2018, an emergency worker does not need to be acting lawfully to be considered 'acting in the exercise of functions'.
Campbell v Crown Prosecution Service [2020] EWHC 3868 (Admin) and DPP v Ahmed [2021] EWHC 2122 (Admin)
Offence of assaulting an emergency worker whilst acting in their function.
Assaults on Emergency Workers (Offences) Act 2018, section 1(1)
Assault with intent to resist lawful apprehension.
Offences Against the Person Act 1861, section 38
Outcomes
Appeal allowed.
The District Judge applied the wrong test for the lawfulness of arrest and entry, requiring a prima facie case of criminal damage rather than reasonable suspicion. His conclusion on the lawfulness of arrest wrongly determined whether officers were acting in their function as emergency workers.
Remitted to the original District Judge.
The case was remitted to District Judge Khanna to re-evaluate the application to dismiss based on the correct legal test, given that the factual findings were largely undisputed.