Sir Peter Fahy, the Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police (GMP) has been charged under health and safety laws in connection with the shooting of an unarmed man by one of his officers.
Anthony Grainger, 36, from Bolton was shot and killed by an officer of GMP on 3 March 2012 during a planned operation to arrest a group of men on suspicion of conspiracy to commit armed robbery. Mr Grainger was not armed when he was fatally shot, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has reported.
An independent investigation was undertaken into the actions of the officers involved in the planning, approval and conduct of the operation.
The CPS has decided that there is sufficient evidence to prove that Greater Manchester Police breached the HSWA 1974 by failing to ensure that unnecessary risk to the suspects was avoided. It is alleged that an unnecessary exposure to risk was caused by serious deficiencies in the preparation for the police operation.
In accordance with the act, criminal liability falls on chief officers of police as corporations sole. A corporation sole is a distinct legal entity and the person holding the office concerned does not share the criminal liability or have to personally appear in court.
Therefore, the CPS has concluded that there is sufficient evidence and it is in the public interest for Sir Peter Fahy to be prosecuted as a corporation sole.
The CPS has also decided that the marksman who killed Mr Grainger should not face charges for murder or manslaughter as a jury would accept that the officer believed his actions necessary and the level of force used in response to the perceived threat was proportionate.
The offence of corporate manslaughter could not be charged as GMP had no relevant duty of care towards Mr Grainger.
Alison Saunders, director of public prosecutions, said: “In addition to every employer’s responsibility towards their employees, the law also imposes a duty to ensure that work is carried out in a way that ensures, so far as is reasonably practicable, that persons outside of their employment are not exposed to risk.
“The chief officers of police forces are treated as employers for this purpose. It is alleged that there were serious deficiencies in the preparation for this operation that unnecessarily exposed individuals to risk.”
The first hearing will take place on 10 February 2014 at Westminster Magistrates’ Court.
The duty of an employer towards non-employees is imposed by section 3(1) of the HSWA 1974 and section 33(1)(a) of the act makes it an offence to fail to discharge this duty. Upon conviction, the Crown Court may impose an unlimited fine on the employer.
As this case is ongoing we won’t be accepting comments on this story.
The Safety Conversation Podcast: Listen now!
The Safety Conversation with SHP (previously the Safety and Health Podcast) aims to bring you the latest news, insights and legislation updates in the form of interviews, discussions and panel debates from leading figures within the profession.
Find us on Apple Podcasts, Spotify and Google Podcasts, subscribe and join the conversation today!
