Police to be prosecuted over Anthony Grainger shooting

Anthony Grainger

Anthony Grainger

First published in News
Last updated

GREATER Manchester Police will be prosecuted over the fatal shooting of an armed robbery suspect.

Ch Con Peter Fahy will be charged with a health and safety breach over the shooting of unarmed man Anthony Grainger.

He is accused of failing to discharge a duty under the Health and Safety at Work Act as he is "corporation sole" for the force, the Crown Prosecution Service said.

This is a legal status, and does not mean that he shares criminal liability or that he will personally have to appear in court.

Mr Grainger, aged 36, from Deane, was shot by a Greater Manchester Police marksman in March 2012 as part of an operation to try to arrest suspected armed robbers.

Alison Saunders, the director of public prosecutions, said: "We have completed our review of the evidence provided by the Independent Police Complaints Commission in relation to the death of Anthony Grainger.

"After careful consideration we have decided that the Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police, Sir Peter Fahy, should be prosecuted as a corporation sole for failing to discharge a duty under the Health and Safety at Work Act.

"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."


MORE:


The first hearing will be on February 10 at Westminster Magistrates Court.

If the conviction is successful, the force would face an unlimited fine.

Prosecutors decided the marksman who killed Mr Grainger should not face charges for murder, manslaughter or misconduct in public office because a jury would be likely to accept that he believed his actions were necessary.

The CPS said: "In the circumstances of this case, our assessment of the evidence is that a jury would accept that the officer did believe his actions were necessary and that the level of force used in response to the threat as he perceived it to be was proportionate.

"The basis for the officer's belief in the necessity of his actions is relevant to the criminal proceedings under the Health and Safety at Work etc Act and it would be inappropriate to publish any further detail at this time.

"There is also insufficient evidence to prosecute the officer for gross negligence manslaughter or misconduct in public office. It would be inappropriate to explain these decisions in detail at this time for the same reason."

GMP could not face a charge of corporate manslaughter because the force had no relevant duty of care towards Mr Grainger.

Dep Ch Con Ian Hopkins said: "Greater Manchester Police notes the decision of the Crown Prosecution Service to take no further action against any officer following the death of Anthony Grainger in March 2012.

"The force also notes the decision of the Crown Prosecution Service to prosecute Greater Manchester Police for a breach of section 3 (1) of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974.

"Since Mr Grainger's death 22 months ago, Greater Manchester Police has co-operated fully with the Independent Police Complaints Commission, the Crown Prosecution Service and HM Coroner.

"Our sympathies remain with Mr Grainger's family and we deeply regret the loss that they have suffered.

"Mr Grainger's family, and the officers involved, have had to wait a long time for this decision to be reached and we share the frustrations over those delays.

"However, we understand that it was vitally important that the investigation was carried out thoroughly to establish all the facts.

"Now that a charging decision has been made regarding the force itself, it is equally important that these legal processes are allowed to take their course unimpeded in order to seek a resolution for both the family of Mr Grainger and the force.

"The Independent Police Complaints Commission investigated this matter independently and we await the official publication of their report.

"This matter also remains the subject of a coronial inquest, so Greater Manchester Police is unable to make further comment at this time."

Mr Grainger was shot dead by officers from Greater Manchester Police after his car was stopped as part of a planned operation in Culcheth, Cheshire, in on March 3, 2012.

It later emerged that the unarmed father of two had earlier been wrongly suspected of stealing a memory stick containing the names of police informants.

The Mail on Sunday reported that he and two associates were put under surveillance in an operation involving nearly 100 officers, and that armed teams were briefed that he might open fire at police, despite there being no evidence of him having access to weapons.

In July this year the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) confirmed that it had finished an investigation of the incident and passed a file to prosecutors.

Between 2009 and 2010, Anthony Grainger was a defendant in one of Bolton's biggest and most complex ever drug cases, but the jury failed to reach a verdict on his drug charges after three trials.

He was jailed for 20 months after admitting handling stolen cars.

Comments (12)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:52am Thu 16 Jan 14

Rememberscarborough says...

Allowing comments on this - really?
Allowing comments on this - really? Rememberscarborough
  • Score: -12

2:26pm Thu 16 Jan 14

The Squire In Residence says...

A serving soldier can be prosecuted for something that happened on a battlefield, but a police officer cannot? Please explain why? It is my understanding that Grainge had NO gun, and so why was deadly force allowed, stun grenade or some other distraction and then taser... he would have lived to stand trial for whatever the police had on him. But alive non the less.
A serving soldier can be prosecuted for something that happened on a battlefield, but a police officer cannot? Please explain why? It is my understanding that Grainge had NO gun, and so why was deadly force allowed, stun grenade or some other distraction and then taser... he would have lived to stand trial for whatever the police had on him. But alive non the less. The Squire In Residence
  • Score: 85

2:40pm Thu 16 Jan 14

Jim271 says...

I never knew that the penalty for being suspected of a crime was death.

I am still amazed that a person can be imprisoned for 9 months for making stupid comments on his facebook page regarding the death of police officers, and yet a male threatens hospital staff and walks away with a slap on the wrist!!!!
I never knew that the penalty for being suspected of a crime was death. I am still amazed that a person can be imprisoned for 9 months for making stupid comments on his facebook page regarding the death of police officers, and yet a male threatens hospital staff and walks away with a slap on the wrist!!!! Jim271
  • Score: 32

2:49pm Thu 16 Jan 14

thomas222 says...

Justice for this Man and his family.
Justice for this Man and his family. thomas222
  • Score: 19

2:51pm Thu 16 Jan 14

thomas222 says...

Only thing missing is a murder charge.... bent as usual!
Only thing missing is a murder charge.... bent as usual! thomas222
  • Score: 15

5:27pm Thu 16 Jan 14

notatroll says...

The thing is he was no angel and the only reason they were following the stolen car on false plates over a period of time was due to certain suspicions of casing shops for armed robbery. Yes he shouldnt have been shot by a trigger happy copper, but if he wasnt involved in crime with criminal associates this situation would never have happened. he was involved allegedly in drugs but found not guilty but was guilty for handling stolen cars. he knocked about with known convicted criminals who have committed crimes of this nature so this is why he and the others were followed. why park in a car park outside of their area? in a stolen car? some form of intention was there in order for the police to follow them covertly its just they ,excuse the pun" jumped the gun" definitely justice for him and the police should be made accountable rather than a piddly fine, but play with fire you get burned!
The thing is he was no angel and the only reason they were following the stolen car on false plates over a period of time was due to certain suspicions of casing shops for armed robbery. Yes he shouldnt have been shot by a trigger happy copper, but if he wasnt involved in crime with criminal associates this situation would never have happened. he was involved allegedly in drugs but found not guilty but was guilty for handling stolen cars. he knocked about with known convicted criminals who have committed crimes of this nature so this is why he and the others were followed. why park in a car park outside of their area? in a stolen car? some form of intention was there in order for the police to follow them covertly its just they ,excuse the pun" jumped the gun" definitely justice for him and the police should be made accountable rather than a piddly fine, but play with fire you get burned! notatroll
  • Score: 10

12:15am Fri 17 Jan 14

ARBEE says...

thomas222 wrote:
Justice for this Man and his family.
AND THE VICTIMS OF HIS CRIMES.
[quote][p][bold]thomas222[/bold] wrote: Justice for this Man and his family.[/p][/quote]AND THE VICTIMS OF HIS CRIMES. ARBEE
  • Score: 5

10:40am Fri 17 Jan 14

thomas222 says...

ARBEE wrote:
thomas222 wrote: Justice for this Man and his family.
AND THE VICTIMS OF HIS CRIMES.
What crime sitting in his car ?...... Your a fool!!
[quote][p][bold]ARBEE[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thomas222[/bold] wrote: Justice for this Man and his family.[/p][/quote]AND THE VICTIMS OF HIS CRIMES.[/p][/quote]What crime sitting in his car ?...... Your a fool!! thomas222
  • Score: -2

11:18am Fri 17 Jan 14

Darrennz says...

Standards. The type of world we wish to live in. If there has been an unlawful killing there needs to be accountability. Who better to charge than the organ grinder.
Standards. The type of world we wish to live in. If there has been an unlawful killing there needs to be accountability. Who better to charge than the organ grinder. Darrennz
  • Score: 2

11:20am Fri 17 Jan 14

JOHN HIGHAM says...

GMP could have been charged with corporate manslaughter act under the health and safety act 1974, Those cases are very very gard to get into the courts and if they was charged under that law they would be going back to court themselves asking to be declared bankrupt.......
GMP could have been charged with corporate manslaughter act under the health and safety act 1974, Those cases are very very gard to get into the courts and if they was charged under that law they would be going back to court themselves asking to be declared bankrupt....... JOHN HIGHAM
  • Score: 0

11:23am Fri 17 Jan 14

notatroll says...

Sitting in a STOLEN car with FALSE number plates.... travelling to various car parks just sitting there coincidentally at similar times to cash vehicle drop off and pick ups.....followed for a reason stopped for a reason shot by a trigger happy officer instead of waiting.... they genuinely thought that day that that was the day they were going to do it!
Sitting in a STOLEN car with FALSE number plates.... travelling to various car parks just sitting there coincidentally at similar times to cash vehicle drop off and pick ups.....followed for a reason stopped for a reason shot by a trigger happy officer instead of waiting.... they genuinely thought that day that that was the day they were going to do it! notatroll
  • Score: -2

9:28pm Fri 17 Jan 14

thomas222 says...

notatroll wrote:
Sitting in a STOLEN car with FALSE number plates.... travelling to various car parks just sitting there coincidentally at similar times to cash vehicle drop off and pick ups.....followed for a reason stopped for a reason shot by a trigger happy officer instead of waiting.... they genuinely thought that day that that was the day they were going to do it!
What rubbish you are saying..... Murder of a unarmed Man is ok if he is in a stolen car..... Your a clown.
[quote][p][bold]notatroll[/bold] wrote: Sitting in a STOLEN car with FALSE number plates.... travelling to various car parks just sitting there coincidentally at similar times to cash vehicle drop off and pick ups.....followed for a reason stopped for a reason shot by a trigger happy officer instead of waiting.... they genuinely thought that day that that was the day they were going to do it![/p][/quote]What rubbish you are saying..... Murder of a unarmed Man is ok if he is in a stolen car..... Your a clown. thomas222
  • Score: 2

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree