12.9.04
Guardian Unlimited
Muslim held in terror raid 'suffered 50 injuries'
CPS declines to prosecute despite medical report on alleged assault
Vikram Dodd
Saturday September 11, 2004
The Guardian
A British Muslim man arrested during a terrorism raid suffered 50 separate injuries after being repeatedly kicked, punched and stamped upon, according to a medical report seen by the Guardian.
The Crown Prosecution Service yesterday announced that no officer would be charged for allegedly assaulting Babar Ahmad, who was arrested in December 2003 at his south London home.
Mr Ahmad was released after six days without charge and made an official complaint about the alleged assault. He claims that as kicks and punches rained down on him he was taunted by an officer saying: "Where is your God now?"
But last month he was arrested again, after the US requested his extradition, alleging he ran a support network for terrorists in Chechnya and Afghanistan.
Friends and supporters condemned the CPS decision and officers involved in the raid could still face disciplinary charges.
Mr Ahmad was yesterday remanded in custody by Bow Street magistrates pending a full extradition hearing.
After Mr Ahmad's first arrest he was examined by a consultant in accident and emergency medicine, Manolis Gavalas, from University College London hospital.
The report found that Mr Ahmad, 30, had been left with blood coming from his ear and in his urine after being arrested, and with injuries to his face, torso, arms and legs.
Mr Gavalas said "excessive force" was used on Mr Ahmad, who claims he did not resist arrest. The consultant also said the beating had been "controlled" and designed to cause pain rather than life-threatening injuries.
The medical report says: "He was punched and kicked all over his head, torso and extremities ... and had his extremity and torso forcefully stamped on.
"He could not keep count of the number of punches and kicks he received, though he recalls that the police officers were wearing gloves.
"Police officers grabbed him by his genitals and pulled him all over like a dog on a lead."
Mr Ahmad says his wife witnessed the alleged assaults and that he was punched in a police van while the handcuffs were pulled tighter and tighter.
After six days he was released without charge.
Mr Gavalas wrote: "There is clearly unequivocal evidence that he was subjected to a harrowing physical and psychological assault by police officers. He was clearly badly beaten up although in a reasonably controlled manner ... aimed at inflicting significant soft tissue trauma with pain, but not to cause any life-threatening injuries."
The CPS said there was insufficient evidence to prosecute any officers, following an investigation by the Met itself.
That inquiry was supervised by the Police Complaints Authority and, after it was abolished, by the Independent Police Complaints Commission.
A source with knowledge of the process that led to the CPS decision said the Met investigation had not uncovered any forensic evidence substantiating Mr Ahmad's claims.
The source added: "If it came to trial it would be one person's word against that of three police officers and it would be very unlikely that a jury would think a case proved beyond a reasonable doubt."
Yesterday, in a letter from Woodhill prison, Mr Ahmad told Eastern Eye newspaper he was in jail because he had complained against the police.
A Scotland Yard spokesman said its directorate of professional standards would consider disciplinary charges.
Muslim held in terror raid 'suffered 50 injuries'
CPS declines to prosecute despite medical report on alleged assault
Vikram Dodd
Saturday September 11, 2004
The Guardian
A British Muslim man arrested during a terrorism raid suffered 50 separate injuries after being repeatedly kicked, punched and stamped upon, according to a medical report seen by the Guardian.
The Crown Prosecution Service yesterday announced that no officer would be charged for allegedly assaulting Babar Ahmad, who was arrested in December 2003 at his south London home.
Mr Ahmad was released after six days without charge and made an official complaint about the alleged assault. He claims that as kicks and punches rained down on him he was taunted by an officer saying: "Where is your God now?"
But last month he was arrested again, after the US requested his extradition, alleging he ran a support network for terrorists in Chechnya and Afghanistan.
Friends and supporters condemned the CPS decision and officers involved in the raid could still face disciplinary charges.
Mr Ahmad was yesterday remanded in custody by Bow Street magistrates pending a full extradition hearing.
After Mr Ahmad's first arrest he was examined by a consultant in accident and emergency medicine, Manolis Gavalas, from University College London hospital.
The report found that Mr Ahmad, 30, had been left with blood coming from his ear and in his urine after being arrested, and with injuries to his face, torso, arms and legs.
Mr Gavalas said "excessive force" was used on Mr Ahmad, who claims he did not resist arrest. The consultant also said the beating had been "controlled" and designed to cause pain rather than life-threatening injuries.
The medical report says: "He was punched and kicked all over his head, torso and extremities ... and had his extremity and torso forcefully stamped on.
"He could not keep count of the number of punches and kicks he received, though he recalls that the police officers were wearing gloves.
"Police officers grabbed him by his genitals and pulled him all over like a dog on a lead."
Mr Ahmad says his wife witnessed the alleged assaults and that he was punched in a police van while the handcuffs were pulled tighter and tighter.
After six days he was released without charge.
Mr Gavalas wrote: "There is clearly unequivocal evidence that he was subjected to a harrowing physical and psychological assault by police officers. He was clearly badly beaten up although in a reasonably controlled manner ... aimed at inflicting significant soft tissue trauma with pain, but not to cause any life-threatening injuries."
The CPS said there was insufficient evidence to prosecute any officers, following an investigation by the Met itself.
That inquiry was supervised by the Police Complaints Authority and, after it was abolished, by the Independent Police Complaints Commission.
A source with knowledge of the process that led to the CPS decision said the Met investigation had not uncovered any forensic evidence substantiating Mr Ahmad's claims.
The source added: "If it came to trial it would be one person's word against that of three police officers and it would be very unlikely that a jury would think a case proved beyond a reasonable doubt."
Yesterday, in a letter from Woodhill prison, Mr Ahmad told Eastern Eye newspaper he was in jail because he had complained against the police.
A Scotland Yard spokesman said its directorate of professional standards would consider disciplinary charges.
