Merseyside Police were today accused of unlawfully arresting a young woman in the same area as the ‘Love Activist’ protests in Liverpool City Centre last year.
Four women are on trial at Liverpool Magistrates’ Court after being arrested outside the old bank building in Castle Street, on April 30.
The women were in the area offering support to the activists, who were illegally occupying the building in protest against austerity and lack of support for the homeless.
Ellie Louise Longman, 19, of Alstonfield Road, Huyton ; Ann Cawson, 58, Regina Road in Walton ; Kim Michelle Scott, 39, of The Grange in Warrington Road, Chester and Amanda Doyle, 27, of Woolfall Crescent, Huyton have all pleaded not guilty to one charge of failing to comply with a section 35 direction excluding a person from an area.
The orders mean the recipient must leave the area immediately and not return within 48 hours, or face possible arrest.
The court heard at the time the building had been sealed off by police after its owners obtained a court order meaning anyone remaining inside was guilty of trespass.
Angela Conlon, prosecuting, told the court that Scott had been staffing a makeshift soup kitchen outside of the building, Cawson had been holding a placard stating “United we stand, divided we fall,” while Doyle became “argumentative and abusive” and began throwing bottles of water.
Longman was arrested after refusing to leave the area, telling arresting officer PC Clarke that she “agreed with the cause”.
The court was played CCTV footage of events outside the building, which showed Inspector Sarah Hamilton attempting to read a warning notice, with the aid of a loudhailer, ordering the crowd to disperse or face arrest.
In the footage protesters could be heard chanting “give peace a chance” in an attempt to drown out Inspector Hamilton’s voice.
The court heard evidence from the Inspector for Liverpool city centre, Neil Arrowsmith, who authorised the use of dispersal notices to clear the area.
He told the court police had received 28 calls from businesses and members of the public about the protesters, which included reports of “minor assaults, graffiti both internal and external, and criminal damage.”
The court heard Inspector Arrowsmith authorised officers to hand section 35 notices to anyone deemed to be contributing or at risk of contributing to “harassment, alarm or distress” to members of the public or who officers suspected to be contributing to criminality in the locality.
He told the court some individuals outside of the building had been passing food up to the occupiers via a “pulley system”, although he could not say whether any of the defendants were involved.
But Richard Brigden, representing Scott and Doyle, questioned him over the law surrounding the notices.
He said: “What you are saying is that there were those occupying the building, and there is no dispute that this was illegal, and that those outside of the building were to be dispersed if they were contributing to that illegality?”
Inspector Arrowsmith agreed.
Mr Brigden asked: “Presence would not be enough in your view?”
Inspector Arrowsmith said: “No, it would have to be behavioural.”
PC Clarke was questioned over his arrest of politics and history student Longman, who had been asked to leave but said she had left her mobile phone inside the building on charge.
Mark McLorinan, representing Longman, asked: “What was it that led you to believe that she was going to be involved in any incident or criminal activity?”
PC Clarke replied: “I knew she had been charging her phone and I knew there was a minor abstraction of electricity in the building, and I had asked her to leave the area.”
Mr McLorinan asked: “Are you in reality trying to tell this court that an 18-year-old girl was contributing to people doing criminal activity inside the building?”
PC Clarke replied: “Yes.
He told the court he gave Longman numerous chances to leave the area, and even offered to de-arrest her if she chose to leave, but she refused.
But Mr McLorinan claimed there was no evidence to warrant PC Clarke approaching his client and asking her to leave, and suggested she was detained in an “unlawful arrest.”
PC Clarke replied: “In my eyes, she was not arrested unlawfully.”
(Proceeding)
Source: http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/