|
|
|
| |
DOWNLOAD OF THE WEEK |
 | |
| | WHAT'S ON | | | | |
| | GOING GREEN | | |
| | LETTERS TO THE EDITOR | | | | |
| | COMMENT AND ANALYSIS | | |
|
|
|
IPCC set to investigate Sussex Police case
Witnesses report hearing a "thud" as police arrested a man later found with
a massive brain injury in a cell.
Garry Reynolds, 39, has been in a coma in hospital since March 2.
His brother Graeme yesterday won a vital round of his bid to see Sussex
Police removed from the investigation into what happened to him.
A High Court judge is expected to rule next week that the Independent Police
Complaints Commission (IPCC) has the power to take over the inquiry.
Until now, events leading up to the arrest were being examined by Sussex
Police, while the investigation of the arrest and subsequent events came
under the remit of the IPCC.
Graeme Reynolds launched a legal bid to take the inquiry completely out of
Sussex Police's hands.
The events of the night of March 1 are still under investigation but what is
known is that Garry left a party at the Rock Pub, Rock Street, at about
midnight.
He was picked up by a taxi driver more than an hour later. What happened in
the intervening period is unknown.
The taxi driver became concerned he would not pay the fare and called
police. It was at that point Garry was arrested after police said he became
aggressive.
Mr Justice Collins told London's High Court that witnesses reported hearing
a 'thud' as Garry was surrounded by police, but exactly what happened at the
scene is still being investigated.
Graeme Reynolds's barrister, Sam Grodzinski, told the court: "When Garry
Reynolds was found in a coma, the IPCC should immediately have been called
in, and from the outset, taken responsibility for the investigation."
Richard Perks, representing the IPCC, argued in court documents: "It is
suggested that Mr Reynolds' faith in the investigative process has been
damaged and that this is a reason for making the order he seeks.
"While that may be unfortunate, it cannot dictate police procedure".
Mr Justice Collins ruled that the IPCC was wrong to consider they had no
power to investigate what happened before Garry Reynolds' arrest.
He told the court: "What matters for the purposes of this investigation, is
whether he sustained the injury when he was arrested, or whether he
sustained the injury before he was arrested.
"If it was not before, then the police are responsible, if it was occasioned
before, then the police are not likely to be responsible."
The judge said he would give full reasons for his decision later, in
writing.
1:54pm Saturday 10th May 2008
Print 
Email this 
CommentPosted by: jo, haywards heath on 2:52pm Sat 10 May 08
From what I remember when this case was first in the news, the taxi driver had said that he was showing signs of a brain injury whilst in his cab before the police were on the scene. There you go...investigation solved.
From what I remember when this case was first in the news, the taxi driver had said that he was showing signs of a brain injury whilst in his cab before the police were on the scene. There you go...investigation solved.
Posted by: Bad, Egg on 3:01pm Sat 10 May 08
There are a few really nasty aggressive police in this city,who like to dish out their own sadistic form of justice when they think they can get away with it.I hope this will get rid of at least one of them,for the others its only a matter of time before more horrible things happen and they hopefully get found out.As always its almost impossible to catch them,they constantly lie for each other to cover their tracks.
Whatever happened in this case,I really hope Garry pulls through ok.
There are a few really nasty aggressive police in this city,who like to dish out their own sadistic form of justice when they think they can get away with it.I hope this will get rid of at least one of them,for the others its only a matter of time before more horrible things happen and they hopefully get found out.As always its almost impossible to catch them,they constantly lie for each other to cover their tracks.
Whatever happened in this case,I really hope Garry pulls through ok.
Posted by: melfromhove, hove on 4:55pm Sat 10 May 08
[quote][bold]jo[/bold] wrote:
From what I remember when this case was first in the news, the taxi driver had said that he was showing signs of a brain injury whilst in his cab before the police were on the scene. There you go...investigation solved.[/quote] I remember this too. I thought that the reason the cabbie called the police, was over concern that the one of the man's eyeballs was blown?
jo wrote:
From what I remember when this case was first in the news, the taxi driver had said that he was showing signs of a brain injury whilst in his cab before the police were on the scene. There you go...investigation solved.
I remember this too. I thought that the reason the cabbie called the police, was over concern that the one of the man's eyeballs was blown?
Posted by: Brian, Hove on 10:28am Sun 11 May 08
[quote][bold]jo[/bold] wrote:
From what I remember when this case was first in the news, the taxi driver had said that he was showing signs of a brain injury whilst in his cab before the police were on the scene. There you go...investigation solved.[/quote] The point that is being missed here is, if he was showing signs of a brain injury before he was arrested, why wasn't this noticed when he was booked into the custody block and then left for several hours while his condition deteriated?
jo wrote:
From what I remember when this case was first in the news, the taxi driver had said that he was showing signs of a brain injury whilst in his cab before the police were on the scene. There you go...investigation solved.
The point that is being missed here is, if he was showing signs of a brain injury before he was arrested, why wasn't this noticed when he was booked into the custody block and then left for several hours while his condition deteriated?
Posted by: Anyone's guess, E Sussex on 1:44pm Sun 11 May 08
But instead, let's all do what we do best eh? Speculate wildly without knowing many of the true facts, whilst tossing a few myths into the mixture and using this story to vent our own prejudices against the police. Far better than the facts I guess.
But instead, let's all do what we do best eh? Speculate wildly without knowing many of the true facts, whilst tossing a few myths into the mixture and using this story to vent our own prejudices against the police. Far better than the facts I guess.
Posted by: TKM, Hollingbury on 10:43pm Sun 11 May 08
don't rely on what you read.
don't rely on what you read.
What are these links for?
If you liked this article and would like to share it with others on the web who might be searching for good content we've made it easy for you to do it.
At the bottom of all articles, you'll see links to six sites. These sites - commonly called 'social bookmark' or 'social news' sites - have large communities of web users who share and rate interesting, useful and fun things on the web.
Clicking the links will automatically add the address of the story you are reading to one of these sites, letting you share it with others. Each site will ask you to register to share stories. Registration is free and once a member, you can store, recommend and search for stories that interest you.
More on Digg
More on del.icio.us
More on Furl
More on reddit
More on NowPublic/
More on Yahoo!
