🔴 LIVE: Manchester Airport Attack Trial Coverage by VPN

🔴 LIVE: Manchester Airport Attack Trial Coverage by VPN.

The trial of two brothers accused of multiple assaults during a police incident at Manchester Airport resumed today at Liverpool Crown Court.

Mohammed Fahir Amaaz, 20, and Muhammad Amaad, 26, both of Tarnside Close in Rochdale, are jointly facing charges arising from a confrontation with police officers on 23 July 2024. The incident was widely circulated on social media following the publication of mobile phone footage, prompting public interest and sparking comment online and in the national press.

Mr Amaaz is accused of assaulting a member of the public, Abdulkareem Hamzah Abbas Ismaeil, by allegedly headbutting him inside a Starbucks café at the airport. He faces a further charge of assault occasioning actual bodily harm against PC Zachary Marsden, one of the attending officers, during the subsequent attempted arrest.

Two additional charges allege that Mr Amaaz assaulted two other police constables during the incident: PC Lydia Ward, allegedly causing her actual bodily harm, and PC Ellie Cook, who was allegedly beaten while performing her duties as an emergency worker.

His brother, Mr Amaad, is charged with a single count of assaulting PC Marsden during the same incident.

Jurors were warned at the outset of proceedings that the trial was likely to attract significant media coverage. Addressing the panel of twelve, Judge Neil Flewitt KC said: “It’s highly likely this case will be reported in the media whether in the press or TV or the radio or elsewhere. It’s also highly likely to be the subject of comment on social media.” He reminded jurors to disregard all external coverage and focus solely on the evidence presented in court.

Much of the prosecution’s case centres on CCTV, police body-worn video, and mobile phone footage recorded by members of the public, some of whom were present in the terminal during the confrontation.
THURSDAY 10th JULY: DAY 8

🔴 1:30 UPDATES - PC WARD DENIES COLLEAGUE USED ‘UNLAWFUL FORCE’

🔴 DEFENCE CLAIMS VIOLENCE SPARKED BY POLICE ACTION

Under continued cross-examination, defence barrister Rosemary Fernandes suggested Mr Amaaz had only acted to defend his brother after witnessing PC Marsden use ‘unlawful force’.

“I don’t think PC Marsden did use unlawful force,” replied PC Ward.

🔴 OFFICER DENIES SUSPECT MISUNDERSTOOD POLICE ACTION

Ms Fernandes said it was possible Mr Amaaz ‘didn’t appreciate’ he was being detained by police.

PC Ward responded: “It doesn’t look like that from the footage or from memory. He’s not defending his brother – I just feel like he’s attacking us.”

🔴 SUGGESTION POLICE COULD HAVE AVOIDED VIOLENCE

Ms Fernandes suggested the altercation may have been avoided if PC Marsden had opened with a ‘civilised conversation’.

“We did what was necessary,” said PC Ward, insisting that the male was violent and the situation escalated too quickly for polite dialogue.

Asked whether being more ‘courteous’ might have de-escalated events, PC Ward replied: “It might not have done – but we don’t know, do we? With the violence that came afterwards, I would suggest there was no reasoning with him.”

🔴 ‘NOT A BULL IN A CHINA SHOP’

The officer rejected the suggestion that PC Marsden had behaved “like a bull in a China shop”.

🔴 1:00 UPDATES : CROSS-EXAMINATION OF PC WARD BEGINS

🔴 NO TIME TO PLAN, SAYS OFFICER

PC Lydia Ward was questioned by Rosemary Fernandes, representing Mr Amaaz, about what discussions had taken place between officers before they entered the car park pay station to make the arrest.

“We are all experienced police officers and deal with what’s in front of us,” said PC Ward. “It wasn’t a situation where we thought we could have a discussion with that.”

🔴 NO THREAT PERCEIVED ON APPROACH

Shown CCTV footage of the moment officers entered the pay station, Ms Fernandes suggested PC Ward had appeared to walk in confidently. The officer agreed, saying there was no apparent threat at that stage.

🔴 OFFICER COULD NOT RECALL ARREST DETAILS

PC Ward said she could not recall whether PC Marsden said anything to Mr Amaaz before detaining him or explained why he was being arrested.

Asked whether the suspect had been cautioned, she replied: “I can’t imagine any of that has happened because of the way the situation escalated, and there would have been time to caution the boy in the blue.”

🔴 12:45 TASER SEEN OVER MR AMAAZ, PEPPER SPRAY DRAWN BY WARD

PC Ward recalled seeing PC Marsden with his Taser stun gun deployed over Mr Amaaz. She then drew her pepper spray in case the stun gun was not effective.

🔴CROWD DID NOT COMPLY WITH POLICE ORDERS

“I was telling them to get back and they weren’t listening. I thought they were going to start interfering with my colleagues.” She said she feared the situation would escalate into further conflict. “I just didn’t know if they were coming for me instead,” PC Ward told the jury. “Honestly, I thought I was going to get into conflict with them.”

🔴 RADIO SUSTAINED DAMAGE - CALL FOR EMERGENCY BACKUP FAILS

During the confrontation, PC Ward pressed the red emergency button on her radio to urgently summon additional colleagues. Her call failed, the battery having fallen out during the confrontation.

🔴 NOSE BROKEN IN CONFRONTATION

PC Ward told the jury she had suffered a broken nose during the incident and later underwent re-alignment surgery to repair the injury.

🔴 12:30 - “BLOOD WAS POURING OUT MY NOSE”

PC Lydia Ward described the moment after she was struck, recalling blood pouring from her nose and a sense of fear amid shouting and bystanders filming the incident. She said no one intervened to assist and that the atmosphere felt hostile.

🔴 BLOOD WAS POURING OUT MY NOSE

PC Ward recalled getting up, blood “pouring out of my nose” and spotting blood on the floor. “I thought, ‘I’ve got a bad injury,’” she said.

🔴 I WAS TERRIFIED

The officer added, “I was terrified. Honestly, I was terrified. I have never experienced that level of violence towards me in my life.”

🔴 FEAR OF WHO WOULD ATTACK NEXT

“I didn’t know who was going to come at me next, who in that crowd was going to try next to swing at me. I was scared of going to the male again and him punching me again in the face.”

🔴 NO HELP — ONLY HOSTILITY

Asked what others in the pay station were doing, PC Ward said she heard shouting and saw people filming on their phones. “Nobody at all came to help or assist. It just felt like everyone in that room was against us. It was honestly terrifying…. I was just terrified of them coming near to me because of the hostility I felt from everyone there.”

🔴 12:10: OFFICER DESCRIBES BEING PUNCHED IN THE FACE BY DEFENDANT: “I JUST REMEMBER IT GOING BLACK”

PC Lydia Ward told the jury she was still trying to restrain Mr Amaaz — the man in blue — when his older brother, Mr Amaad, began interfering in the arrest.

“I have hold of his arm, trying to keep it behind his back so I could get the handcuffs on him,” she said.

She recalled Mr Amaad pushing PC Marsden to the side and then Amaaz, in blue, kicking him repeatedly.

“He was proper raising his leg and laying into him and booting him.”

PC Ward said she tried to pull Mr Amaad off her colleague when the situation escalated.

“I remember then he just turned and punched me straight in the face.

🔴 I’VE NEVER IN MY WHOLE TIME IN THE POLICE SERVICE HAD SOMEONE USE THAT LEVEL OF VIOLENCE TOWARDS ME

The officer described the moment of impact:

“I just remember it going black. I remember being punched in the face and falling backwards on the floor and everything going black and coming round.”

She said the punch was extremely forceful.

“I’ve never been punched in my life… I’ve never in my whole time in the police service had someone use that level of violence towards me.”

PC Ward said she hit the floor hard and believed she had been knocked unconscious.

“I fell really hard. I just remember thinking: ‘He’s knocked me out.’”

🔴 12:00 UPDATE- ‘SUSPECT DIDN’T WANT TO BE ARRESTED’

PC Ward tells the jury the suspect’s resistance indicated he didn’t want “that kind of interaction with the police” & might “potentially become violent”

🔴 OFFICER BELIEVED SUSPECT WAS RESISTING ARREST

Asked what she believed Mr Amaaz’s resistance meant, PC Ward told the jury:

“It indicated to me that this is a person who’s going to start potentially being violent and did not want to be arrested — didn’t want to have that kind of interaction with the police.”

🔴 SECONDARY ‘FRACAS’ DEVELOPS INVOLVING AMAAD: PC Ward said her attention was mainly focused on securing Mr Amaaz and removing him from the scene, and she wasn’t fully aware of what Mr Amaad, the older brother, was doing at that moment.

“I know something was happening there because PC Cook and PC Marsden had drawn their attention towards Mr Amaad, the larger male, who’s coming over and starting to be serious.”

“There’s some sort of fracas happening between PC Cook, PC Marsden and him — and they were trying to get him away so they could effect the arrest.”

🔴 11:40 - UPDATE : “It went from nought to a hundred“

SITUATION ESCALATED RAPIDLY, OFFICER SAYS

PC Ward told the court she couldn’t recall speaking to Mr Amaaz or identifying herself to him during the incident. She believed none of the police officers involved “had a chance to say anything” to the suspect before the situation escalated.

SUSPECT SHOWED SIGNS OF RESISTANCE

“It just escalated that quickly,” the officer said, adding she felt the suspect “tensing up and resisting.”

PC Ward described sensing Mr Amaaz’s muscles tighten as he resisted their attempts to control him.

Pressed further, she said: “I don’t know how else to describe it — he was resisting us. It went from nought to a hundred.”

🔴 11:30 - UPDATE: COURT HEARS THAT THE ‘CROWD’ FOUND IN CAR PARK PAY AREA ADDS A RISK FACTOR AS MARSDEN POINTS OUT SUSPECT

OFFICER NOTICED GROWING CROWD IN PAY STATION

PC Ward told the jury that as she entered the car park pay station, she observed a “bit of a crowd” gathered around the area.

• She recalled PC Marsden identifying the suspect and saying “that’s him” as they walked toward the ticket machine.

• Asked whether the man appeared to be with anyone else, the officer said: “At that point he looked to be on his own. Obviously there’s a crowd of people in that area and we weren’t sure who was with who or if people were together or not.”

INCREASED RISK TO OFFICERS AND PUBLIC

The PC was asked about the risk assessment she made at the time. She said she was aware there was now a greater risk to both the public and officers than initially expected.

🔴 11:20 - UPDATE - PC WARD: THE THREE OFFICERS WHO APPROACHED THE SCENE DID NOT HOLD FORMAL BRIEFING AHEAD OF ARREST

PC Ward told the jury there was no formal briefing before the suspect was approached, as the situation was fast-moving and she was with experienced officers.

• The officer said she believed there were “reasonable grounds” to arrest the male based on reports he had headbutted someone and then walked off. She said arrest was “necessary” given the violence and the fact the incident had taken place at an international airport.

• PC Ward explained that had the man been classed a “high risk offender,” a more structured arrest plan would have been agreed — but this situation was “dynamic,” and the officers were “on the same level of understanding” as they approached the car park pay station.

🔴 11:10 -UPDATE - OFFICERS RECEIVE LIVE INTEL AS ARREST PLAN TAKES SHAPE

Having received a live update from police control: a male matching the suspect’s description had been spotted on CCTV,

PC Ward told the court she and firearms officers PC Marsden and PC Cook made their way towards Terminal 2 pick-up area.

She said she was informed by PC Marsden that the suspect had allegedly headbutted someone and would be arrested on suspicion of assault. At that point, she explained, the officers agreed the priority was to carry out an arrest.

There was a short tactical discussion between the three, the jury heard, and it was decided PC Marsden would take the lead on detaining the suspect while she would handle transport in the police van.

Asked if she recalled a conversation about the exact offence the suspect was to be arrested for, PC Ward said she could not remember one taking place.

🔴 11:05 - UPDATE - OFFICER DESCRIBES HER DUTIES AND HOW SHE WAS CALLED TO THE INCIDENT

🔴 BACKGROUND: OFFICER’S ROLE AND EQUIPMENT

PC Lydia Ward told the jury she was on duty in full police uniform on the day of the incident, equipped with standard-issue kit including body armour, handcuffs, pepper spray, a body-worn video camera and police radio. She confirmed she did not carry a Taser, as she was not Taser-trained.

She was working a 12-hour shift from 7am to 7pm, partnered with another unarmed officer. They were patrolling in a police van fitted with a rear prisoner cage and equipped with emergency response tools such as blue lights.

🔴 CALLED TO FIGHT AT STARBUCKS, SUSPECT DESCRIBED AS ‘MALE IN BLUE’

At approximately 8:15pm, PC Ward was dispatched to Starbucks in Terminal 2 following a report of a fight in progress. Armed colleagues, including PCs Marsden and Cook, were already at the scene when she arrived.

She said she did not speak to any civilians at the Starbucks location. Soon after, she received information that the suspect had left the area and was believed to have walked towards the Terminal 2 pick-up zone. The individual was described over the radio as a male wearing a blue outfit.
🔴 11:00 - UPDATE- PC WARD OUTLINES POLICING BACKGROUND AND ROLE AT MANCHESTER AIRPORT

PC Lydia Ward told the jury she joined Greater Manchester Police in January 2018, having previously served for two years as a special constable with Lancashire Police.

Assigned initially to the Wigan division, she worked as a response officer, routinely attending 999 and 101 calls and regularly carrying out arrests.

She confirmed that by the time of the incident at Manchester Airport, she had been based there for approximately 18 months, starting in December 2022. At the airport, she worked as an unarmed constable on a mixed team alongside armed colleagues, including PCs Marsden and Cook.

🔴 10:55 PC LYDIA WARD, OFFICER WHO SUSTAINED BROKEN NOSE AT THE SCENE, BEGINS TESTIMONY, ALLOWED TO REMAIN SEATED DUE TO PREGNANCY

Jurors returned to court this morning as the prosecution began calling PC Lydia Ward, the officer who sustained serious injuries during the confrontation at Manchester Airport. Junior counsel Adam Birkby began taking her through her evidence.

Judge Neil Flewitt KC apologised to the jury for the delayed start, noting there was “a good reason” for the timing. PC Ward, who is heavily pregnant, was permitted to give her evidence while seated.
🔴 10:20 : Hi and welcome to our continuing live coverage of the Manchester Airport assault trail.

WEDNESDAY 9th JULY: Day 7

🔴 5:05 : FINAL UPDATE UNTIL TOMORROW

🔴 OFFICER CLAIMS DEFENDANT HIT HIS OWN MOTHER

PC Marsden told the court he believed Mr Amaad had struck his own mother, causing her to fall to the ground during the confrontation at the Manchester Airport pay station.

The officer said the defendant delivered the blow with enough force to knock her off her feet, based on what he witnessed in the moment.

Jury dismissed until tomorrow morning.

🔴 5:00 UPDATE - PROSECUTION RE-EXAMINES FIREARMS OFFICER

CPS CLEARED PC MARSDEN OF ANY CRIMINAL OFFENCE

During re-examination by Paul Greaney KC, who is prosecuting Amaaz and Amaad, PC Zachary Marsden confirmed he was informed by the Crown Prosecution Service that he would face no criminal charges over his actions during the airport altercation.

🔴 4:45 UPDATE - OFFICER DENIES ACTING OUT OF ANGER USING UNNECESSARY, DISPROPORTIONATE OR UNREASONABLE FORCE

Jurors were shown a still image from the arrest showing blood visible in the mouth of Muhammad Amaad.

Under questioning, PC Marsden denied he had “taken [his] anger out” on the defendant or that he had caused the injury shown in the image.

SUGGESTIONS OF MISCONDUCT STRONGLY REJECTED

The officer also rejected multiple accusations from the defence barrister — including that he had lost self-control, acted without integrity, or failed to be honest with the jury.

NO ABUSE OF POSITION, SAYS PC

Asked whether he had abused his role as a police and firearms officer, PC Marsden replied firmly: “No.”

He also denied using unnecessary, disproportionate or unreasonable force during the incident.

🔴 4:30 UPDATE - OFFICER DENIES USING UNLAWFUL FORCE IN AIRPORT ARREST

PC Marsden has rejected claims he used excessive or unlawful force during the arrest of Muhammad Amaad in the car park pay station at Manchester Airport.

He was being questioned by Chloe Gardner, the barrister representing Mr Amaad.

‘UNREASONABLE, UNNECESSARY AND DISPROPORTIONATE’

Ms Gardner put it to the officer that his conduct had been “unreasonable, unnecessary and disproportionate”.

“I strongly disagree with that,” PC Marsden replied.

USE OF TASER COMPARED TO ‘SHOOTING SOMEONE’

The barrister suggested his use of the Taser resembled shooting a person.

“Out of context, yes,” the officer admitted.

DEFENDANT WAS COMPLIANT, SAYS DEFENCE

PC Marsden accepted that Mr Amaad eventually went to his knees with his hands raised near his head.

However, the officer said it took “seven or eight” commands before the defendant complied, and that he had refused to get to the ground from “the very first command”.

KICK AIMED AT ‘UPPER THIGH’, NOT BODY

The officer denied kicking Mr Amaad’s body while he was on his knees. He stated the kick had been delivered to the “upper thigh”.

Ms Gardner suggested the force used was “completely unjustified”.

“I disagree,” said PC Marsden.

‘NO CONSCIOUS EFFORT’ TO SLAM SUSPECT’S FACE TO FLOOR

Finally, the barrister put it to the officer that he had grabbed her client by the neck and “slammed” his face into the ground.

PC Marsden denied the claim, responding: “I made no conscious effort to do so.”

🔴 3:50 - PC MARSDEN BELIEVES AMAAD TRIED TO GRAB TASER

PC Marsden has defended his decision to deploy his Taser during the chaotic scenes inside the airport car park pay station, telling jurors he believed the device had been grabbed twice and that he was too busy being punched to issue any verbal warning.

CLAIM TASER WAS GRABBED TWICE

PC Marsden told the jury that during the scuffle with Mr Amaad, he believed his Taser stun gun was grabbed on two separate occasions.

He insisted there were “hands pulling at my equipment” before the device was drawn.

TOO BUSY TO EXPLAIN

Pressed by Ms Gardner on whether he communicated with Mr Amaad about reaching for the Taser, PC Marsden replied:

“I was too busy being punched to tell him I wanted my Taser.”

DISPUTED FOOTAGE INTERPRETATION

Ms Gardner suggested her client had never tried to take the Taser at all.

PC Marsden maintained it was “clearly visible” on the footage that Mr Amaad had grabbed the device.

When Ms Gardner put it to him that her client only touched his hand, the PC replied: “I would strongly disagree.”

CHILDREN NEARBY WHEN TASER FIRED

The officer was also asked if he noticed “two young girls” standing close by when he discharged the Taser.

He said the device was fired from “less than an inch” away from Mr Amaaz’s chest, and that his focus was on the suspect’s centre mass, which he could still clearly see despite his prescription lenses.

🔴 3:10 - SECOND BARRISTER ASKS PC MARSDEN IF HE LOST CONTROL DURING INCIDENT AND LATER GAVE UNTRUE VERSION OF EVENTS

CLAIMED ARM RESTRICTION

Ms Gardner, the defence barrister, suggests that PC Marsden lied in his official IOPC statement when he claimed someone had restricted him by grabbing both arms.

Marsden denies lying. He concedes that saying “arms” (plural) may not have been strictly accurate — implying only one arm may have been involved.

MOVEMENT OF FIREARM

She then challenges another part of his statement — that he said he felt his firearm (Glock pistol)move across his leg during the confrontation.

Marsden again denies this was a lie and maintains that’s what he believed he felt at the time.

BODY-CAM VS STATEMENT

Ms Gardner plays body-cam footage of Marsden telling other officers that “Mr Amaad jumped on me from behind and hit me and I had to smash him in the face.”

She contrasts that with Marsden’s formal statement, in which he said he struck Mr Amaaz in the face with his elbow to “create space” because someone was approaching him from behind.

Marsden explains that he was trying to break free from a grip and wasn’t trying to hit anyone deliberately.

NO MOVEMENT DESPITE PRESSURE?

She asks why he didn’t visibly move or stumble despite claiming he felt weight and pressure on his legs from behind.

Marsden replies that he had a “genuine belief” he was being attacked and feared his gun might be taken.

‘OUT OF CONTROL’ ACCUSATION

Ms Gardner accuses him of being “out of control” in that moment.

Marsden flatly denies this, saying: “That’s your opinion.”

‘BATTERING’ CLAIM DISPUTED

Ms Gardner argues that Marsden struck Mr Amaad in the face unnecessarily, as Amaad didn’t retaliate or pose a threat.

Marsden disagrees, saying Amaad was still very close to him and within a “fighting arc”, implying he still felt threatened.

🔴 2:50 - OFFICER ADMITS TO DISCREPANCY IN PART OF HIS ACCOUNT

PC Zachary Marsden told jurors he wasn’t aware Mr Amaad was inside the pay station when he approached to detain his brother.

Defence barrister Chloe Gardner suggested Mr Amaad had calmly said “easy” five times followed by “no, no, no” — but PC Marsden said he didn’t hear it “in that environment.”

When body-cam footage later confirmed the words had been said, the officer accepted he could hear them in the recording but denied he had been acting irrationally.

Ms Gardner said the footage showed Mr Amaad placing a hand under the officer’s arm, not assaulting him. PC Marsden responded that “his perception was different to how it appears on camera.”

He accepted there was a “discrepancy” between his written statement — claiming both arms had been grabbed — and what the video showed. But he strongly denied lying, saying the statement was written just hours after being “violently attacked” and “scared”, and before he had seen the footage.

🔴 2:30 - PC QUESTIONED BY SECOND DEFENCE KC

The court is back in session, and the barrister for older brother Mr. Amaad is not cross examining PC Marsden.

ARMED OFFICER QUESTIONED ON GUN AWARENESS IN CROWD

PC Zachary Marsden told the court he was “always conscious” he was carrying a loaded Glock 17 throughout his shift at Manchester Airport.

Under cross-examination, the firearms officer said the weapon “never left my side” and was “recognisable as a gun” despite being smaller than a carbine.

Defence barrister Chloe Gardner suggested he “bumped” the firearm against a woman in the crowded car park pay station. PC Marsden denied this was normal, saying airport officers often moved through tight spaces, including aircraft, but insisted he was carefully navigating the crowd.

🔴 1:20 - OFFICER SAYS POST-INCIDENT COMMENTS WERE NOT FULLY REPRESENTATIVE

Jurors were shown body-worn camera footage in which PC Zachary Marsden, shortly after the alleged assaults at Manchester Airport, described the incident to colleagues. In the recording, the officer is heard saying one of the brothers had headbutted a man, that he was later surrounded by “seven or eight people,” and that he had been forced to strike one of the men “in the face with an elbow”.

Pressed on the accuracy of those remarks, PC Marsden told the court the video did not fully represent what had occurred. He said the comments captured in the footage were influenced by his attempt to “put on a brave face” and “mask vulnerability” in front of fellow officers, describing this as a common human instinct. “It’s a very human feature to do,” he said.

‘I’M THE ONE WHO EXPERIENCED THAT’

The defence KC suggested to the officer that his description of events was exaggerated. PC Marsden replied: “I’m the one who’s experienced that and that’s how I perceived it having been viciously and violently attacked by both of the men in this.”

CROWD LABELLED ‘HOSTILE’

PC Marsden said the crowd in the pay station had been “hostile” and that officers received no assistance from bystanders. “No-one in that room was with us. They watched us getting violently beaten again and again,” he said.

When Mr Khan asked: “Including the women and children?” the officer replied: “I’m not specifically referring to one individual.”

🔴 1:05 - OFFICER REVEALS ‘MINUTE BLEEDS TO BRAIN’ AFTER AIRPORT ALTERCATION

PC Zachary Marsden told the jury he had suffered “minute bleeds” to the brain following the incident at Manchester Airport, later diagnosed with symptoms of post-concussion syndrome.

The firearms officer confirmed that the injuries he sustained during the confrontation may have impacted the initial statement he gave shortly afterwards.

MEDICS TOLD OF JAW PROBLEMS, INSOMNIA & CONCUSSION
He said he had attended hospital, where he showed doctors footage of the incident, underwent an x-ray, and had since experienced ongoing issues with his jaw. He also informed medical staff he was suffering from insomnia.

Mr Imran Khan KC suggested the insomnia was linked to the footage of the incident “going viral” online. PC Marsden replied: “I chose to remove myself from social media due to the nature of the risk posed to me.”

PC SAYS STATEMENT MAY HAVE BEEN AFFECTED BY INJURIES

The officer agreed that the trauma of the incident, including the head injuries, may have affected the statement he provided on the night.

🔴 12:55 -ALLEGATION OF ‘UNPROFESSIONAL CONDUCT’ DENIED

OFFICER SAYS HE WAS ‘EXHAUSTED’ & SUPPORTED COLLEAGUE’S DECISION

PC Marsden told the court he was “exhausted” and keen to allow a colleague to carry out an arrest following the earlier confrontation in the airport car park’s pay station. He said he wanted to avoid “another hostile situation” developing.

DEFENCE SUGGESTS SUSPECT ‘DIDN’T DO ANYTHING’

Mr Imran Khan KC put it to the witness that the man being arrested “didn’t do anything”. PC Marsden responded that he did not know the specific “grounds” for the arrest, as it was being made by PC Mark Flanagan, a firearms officer with over 25 years of experience.

The witness said he trusted PC Flanagan “completely to make the right decision” and that he had simply been “helping him to the best of my abilities”.

ALLEGATION OF ‘UNPROFESSIONAL CONDUCT’ DENIED

The defence KC suggested that the officers had acted “in concert unprofessionally”, but PC Marsden replied: “That would be your opinion.”

He added that his priority was to assist in getting the man “to the floor” so that he would be “in a position of disadvantage” to facilitate the arrest.

🔴 12:40 OFFICER SAYS HE WAS ‘NOT ANGRY’ & DEFENDS PEPPER SPRAY USE AS ‘PRE-EMPTIVE’ ACTION

PC Marsden told the court he had “anticipated violence” when he returned to the pay station area, shortly before deploying incapacitant spray on one of three men who had been filming officers. When it was suggested to him the man had been “simply filming,” the officer responded: “I don’t describe it as simply filming. I describe it as obstructing and creating a barrier.”

The officer denied that anger played any role in his decision-making.

JUDGE PERMITS LINE OF QUESTIONING

At this stage, Paul Greaney KC for the prosecution intervened, telling the jury that proceedings had drifted “a long way from the issues in the case.” However, Judge Neil Flewitt KC clarified that his understanding of the defence position was that the defendants had been “dealing with officers who were out of control” — noting that the phrase was his own — and confirmed he would allow the line of questioning to continue.

OFFICER CLAIMED HE FEARED FURTHER VIOLENCE

Pressed again on his actions, PC Marsden said: “I was terrified we are now on the tipping point of another violent situation.” He told the jury that he “did not want this to happen again” and had therefore made the decision to use force in what he described as a “pre-emptive” move to bring the man to the floor.

🔴 12:35: PEPPER SPRAY LATER DEPLOYED BY PC MARSDEN ON CROWD AT PAY STATION

Jurors were shown CCTV footage of PC Marsden re-entering the pay station after both defendants had been led away. The video captured officers engaging with three men who were filming the incident, one of whom was then sprayed with incapacitant spray by PC Marsden.

OFFICER CLAIMS ACTION WAS FOR CROWD CONTROL

Explaining his use of force, PC Marsden told the court it was a “matter of crowd control.” He said he believed the man he sprayed — identified as Ali Rahman — was attempting to obstruct an arrest being carried out by PC Mark Flanagan on another individual nearby.

The officer denied he was acting out of anger, and said he did not regard the crowd at that point as hostile, but maintained that officers were “being obstructed.”

BODY-CAM SHOWS ARREST ATTEMPT

Jurors were also played body-worn footage showing PC Flanagan telling a man: “You’re getting locked up.” A voice in the footage could be heard responding: “No, no, no, we haven’t done nothing.”

PC Marsden said the man at the front of the group of three was “creating a barrier” and physically preventing his colleague from completing the arrest.

🔴 12:15 - OFFICER DENIES TASER CAUSED EYE INJURY TO MOTHER OF THE TWO DEFENDANTS

JURORS SHOWN IMAGE OF INJURY TO MRS AKHTAR

Jurors were shown a photograph of an eye injury sustained by Mrs Akhtar. PC Marsden told the court he did not believe he had caused the injury, saying: “I believe it’s unclear whether it was my actions that caused the injury. I believe I was not the only person to make contact with Mrs Akhtar which could cause that injury.”

OFFICER DENIES STRIKING WOMAN WITH TASER

Imran Khan KC suggested the officer had struck Mrs Akhtar with his Taser. PC Marsden responded that, in his view, the injury could not be “wholly attributed” to him. He explained that he had attempted to push Mrs Akhtar away, and agreed that he believed this action was “justified.”

PULLED FORWARD DURING ARREST, OFFICER CLAIMS

PC Marsden said Mrs Akhtar had interfered with his grip and was pulling him forward as he tried to restrain Mr Amaaz. “My purpose going down on the knee was to secure and place him into handcuffs,” he said, but added that he was being physically pulled on top of the suspect.

He denied delivering a hard push on Mrs Akhtar, and when it was suggested he could have used the back of his hand, the officer replied: “I believe this was a fast-paced incident.”

DENIAL OF EXCESSIVE FORCE

“There was a risk of me being pulled onto the male who’s just assaulted me and I have to act to control him,” PC Marsden said. When the KC put it to him that Mrs Akhtar posed no threat and that he was “out of control,” the officer replied: “I would deny that.”

🔴 11:45 KC RAISES CONCERNS OVER FIREARMS OFFICER’S EYESIGHT

PC Marsden confirmed to the court that, at the time of the incident, his eyesight prescription was -2.5 in his left eye and -2.25 in his right.

Mr Khan KC, representing the defence, remarked he did not intend to be “facetious” but questioned whether such a prescription could lead to “the wrong person [ending] up shot.”

At this point, Paul Greaney KC, for the prosecution, intervened—telling the judge the officer’s firearms training with GMP was “entirely in order” and that Mr Khan “knows that.”

🔴 11:40 OFFICER MAINTAINS FOOT WAS ON FLOOR, NOT ON SUSPECT

PC Marsden told the court the CCTV footage showed his foot placed on the floor—not on Mr Amaaz’s head—as he attempted to secure the loose wire from his police radio.

When Mr Khan KC asked whether that was “really” his evidence to the jury, the officer responded:

“This is the evidence I have provided, yes.”

PC Marsden said he had not seen Mrs Akhtar placing her hands on her son’s head during the incident. He told the court his attention had been on locating his radio, and that his purpose was to “clamp the wire” with his foot to prevent it being taken or used.

🔴 11:35 UPDATE - OFFICER FURTHERINSISTS RADIO STAMP WAS AIMED AT WIRE, NOT SUSPECT

Pressed on why he had not simply retrieved the fallen radio by hand, the officer explained that he required both hands to operate his Taser at the time.

Describing his intent, he said: “To clamp the wire around my foot, and when I pushed my foot down, to create a clamp between the radio, the wire and myself.”

“My purpose was I was aiming for the wire,” he added.

PC Marsden told the court he did not believe his foot made contact with Mr Amaaz’s head during the moment captured on video.

Imran Khan KC suggested that the officer’s foot was “nowhere near the wire” and accused him of having “lost control”.

PC Marsden replied: “I’m trying to answer to the best of my abilities. I’m not justifying a stamp on someone’s head… I do not believe I made contact.”

When the KC described the act of stamping on someone’s head as “reckless”, the officer responded: “If it’s not justified, I would agree.”

🔴 11:35 UPDATE - OFFICER OFFERS FURTHER EXPLANATION OF ‘STAMP’ TO CATCH WIRE & KEEP RADIO FROM SUSPECT.

Imran Khan KC is taking the PC Marsden through detailed video footage of the final moments of his restraining of Mr. Amaaz. PC Marsden told the court that in the sequence being shown he was attempting to ‘stamp down on the wire’ of his radio which was hanging loose in the fracas. He added that he was sensitive to the risks of a suspect seizing hold of his police radio, a situation he has been in earlier in his work.

Asked why he didn’t reach down with his hands, he answererd:

“I didn’t want to take this risk”, adding that such a manouver would leave him vulnerable to being pulled to the gr ound by Amaaz.

🔴 11:05 OFFICER RESPONDS TO FOOTAGE OF HIM APPEARING TO ‘KNEE’ MR AMAAZ IN THE BACK

The officer is shown footage of him appearing to knee Mr Amaaz in the back.

The officer agreed that once Mr Amaaz was no longer a threat there was no longer a need to use force.

Asked why he did this, PC Marsden said: “My purpose was to keep him down on the floor whilst I put the handcuffs on him.”

Pressed further, he said: “I can’t account for the way he reacts. I can only prepare for the worst.”

🔴 10:45 : Welcome to our live coverage of Day 7 of the trial, bringing you all the updates. Proceedings are about to resume, with further cross-examination of PC Marsden.

TUESDAY 8th JULY: DAY 6:

🔴 4:46 : COURT PROCEEDINGS END FOR THE DAY AND THE JURY IS SENT HOME AND WILL RETURN TOMORROW MORNING.

🔴 4:45: DEFENCE ACCUSES OFFICER OF LOSING CONTROL IN CRUCIAL MOMENT

Mr Khan KC challenged PC Marsden on the intent and necessity behind the kick to Mr Amaaz, suggesting less severe alternatives had been available. He put it to the officer that he could have aimed the strike at the stomach instead of the head. PC Marsden replied that Mr Amaaz was lying face down, making that “not an option.”

The barrister proposed the officer had acted out of anger following the earlier assault. “You were furious,” said Mr Khan. “Those are your words, not mine,” replied PC Marsden.

“You grabbed him round the neck because the red mist had fallen from your eyes,” the KC continued. “No,” said the officer.

Mr Khan described the kick as “gratuitous” and a “loss of control.” PC Marsden denied this, maintaining it was “just hard enough” to stun the suspect and “achieve the desired effect.” When pressed again on whether it had been “pretty harsh,” the officer replied: “No, it wasn’t.”
🔴 4:35 : OFFICER DESCRIBES HEAD KICK TO ‘STUN’ MR AMAAZ : ‘ALL OTHER OPTIONS WERE EXHAUSTED’

PC Zachary Marsden told the court he made a split-second decision to deliver a kick to Mr Amaaz during the incident at Manchester Airport, describing it as an effort to “disorient and stun” the suspect after ruling out other tactical options.

Asked directly by defence counsel Imran Khan KC whether the kick had been deliberate, PC Marsden replied: “Yes.” He said at the time he believed he was under continued threat and had limited means to respond.

MOTHER’S PRESENCE QUESTIONED DURING CONFRONTATION

Mr Khan suggested the officer could see Mr Amaaz was lying on the floor and interacting with a woman, alleged to be his mother, who appeared to be caring for him. The PC replied that he could not confirm what the woman was doing but said, “It looks like she’s got her hands on his back.”

The officer told jurors he did not focus on the woman’s presence, stating: “I wasn’t looking at the woman. I was looking at the threat.” He said he believed she was pulling Mr Amaaz away from him. When the barrister accused him of “making things up as you go along,” PC Marsden replied, “I believe she’s pulling him away from me.”

OFFICER SAYS HE AVOIDS FOOTAGE DUE TO ‘DISTRESS’

Pressed on the visual evidence, PC Marsden told the jury: “I have not watched this footage. I choose not to because of the distress it brings me.” He said his recollection of events was based on real-time perception, not later review of body-cam or CCTV.

‘I HAD TO ACT FAST’ – OFFICER RECOUNTS OPTIONS UNDER PRESSURE

The officer said he had considered multiple tactical responses in the seconds before the kick, including the use of his baton, pepper spray, or a further deployment of his Taser. However, he explained that the Taser would have required him to disconnect it from Mr Amaad, who had already been struck by its barbs, and reload.

He confirmed he also considered drawing his firearm, stating that this option was reserved for when a subject posed such danger that its use might be justified. “That could possibly be fatal,” he said, adding: “I did not wish Mr Amaaz to come to such harm.”

The officer told jurors he was fatigued and out of viable alternatives: “These are seconds I did not have unfortunately. This incident was fast and quick and not at a quarter speed. I had to act fast.”

He said the purpose of the kick was to “stun” Mr Amaaz and give him a chance to regain control of the situation. “All my other options were exhausted — including doing nothing,” he said.

DEFENCE CHALLENGES OFFICER’S CLAIM THAT KICK WAS ‘SAFEST OPTION’

Mr Khan KC pressed the officer on whether he had truly weighed all tactical options before delivering the kick. “Are you telling the jury you thought of all those options within that second? When the safest option was to kick somebody in the head?”

“Yes,” replied PC Marsden.

“It wasn’t the safest option, was it?” pressed the barrister. “That’s your opinion, not mine,” the officer responded.

The PC agreed that a kick to the head could cause brain damage, and accepted that in certain circumstances, “if delivered with such force,” it could be fatal.

“I would argue so would a gunshot,” he added.

The defence KC probed him further on the kick to his client:

“That’s the safest option for you, is it? Is that right?” asked Mr Khan.

“Yes,” replied the officer.

“In the head?” repeated the KC. “Yes,” said PC Marsden.

🔴 4:12 OFFICER SAID HE FELT HE WAS ‘BEING STRANGLED’ AS HE DESCRIBES COMING UNDER HEAVY ATTACK WITH LIMITED AWARENESS OF THE WIDER SITUATION

OFFICER FELT HE WAS BEING STRANGLED DURING ATTACK AT AIRPORT PAY STATION

PC Zachary Marsden told the jury he believed he was being strangled during the height of the incident at the Manchester Airport car park pay station.

“I received blows up until the point where arms connect around my throat and then I feel a tightening around my grip,” the officer said, describing how his awareness of the wider situation had become severely impaired.

OFFICER UNABLE TO SEE COLLEAGUES’ ACTIONS

PC Marsden confirmed he did not see PC Ellie Cook or PC Lydia Ward fire their Tasers, nor was he able to observe their positions during the confrontation. The officer said he had by then already received “ten to 15 or more heavy blows to the head and around the ears and face”.

DISORIENTED AND STRUGGLING TO ASSESS THREATS

Asked about his mental and physical state during the struggle, the officer agreed he was disoriented. He said his focus was divided between trying to assess whether the suspect was preparing to launch a renewed attack, and attempting to make a radio call for help.

“I’m trying to assess the behaviour of the subject that’s just violently attacked me and assess whether they are getting up to attack me again whilst I’m trying to get on the radio to seek help,” he said.

NO AWARENESS OF WHO WAS AROUND HIM

PC Marsden told the jury: “I had no perception of who’s around me.”

He said he could not say how many people were present during the critical stages of the encounter due to his impaired vision and head injuries.

🔴 3:54 UPDATE BODY-CAM FOOTAGE REVIEWED AS OFFICER DESCRIBES SUDDEN FORCE FROM BEHIND

PC Zachary Marsden told jurors he felt “a weight” strike him from behind during the confrontation at the Manchester Airport pay station, but said he could not determine at the time whether it was one person or two. He said he was also unsure if the force was an attempt to grab his Glock sidearm.

The officer was being questioned about the role of Mr Amaad, the elder of the two brothers, and said he had no recollection of hearing Mr Amaad say “easy, easy,” as suggested by the defence. PC Lydia Ward’s body-worn video was played to jurors, but PC Marsden maintained that he had not heard those words during the incident.

BODY-CAM LEFT ON STANDBY DURING BUILD-UP

The defence KC pressed the officer on why his own body-worn camera was on standby and not actively recording before the confrontation began. PC Marsden said he did not believe the walk to the pay station was likely to yield evidential material, and therefore had not activated his device earlier.

KICK FROM SUSPECT ONLY IDENTIFIED LATER

PC Marsden said it was only months after the incident that he became aware he had been kicked. He confirmed his glasses had come off during the altercation, affecting his visibility.

Mr Khan, for the defence, suggested that Mr Amaad’s actions were in defence of his brother, who he believed was being restrained or assaulted by police officers. PC Marsden did not agree with that characterisation but acknowledged that by that stage he could no longer see clearly.

TASER USE AND PERCEPTION OF FIREARM DEPLOYMENT

The officer confirmed he had drawn his Taser and aimed it at Mr Amaad, who was by then engaged in the incident. PC Marsden said Mr Amaaz, visible on camera looking toward his brother, may have seen this and reacted. The KC suggested Mr Amaaz may have mistakenly believed a firearm was being used against his brother.

PC Marsden clarified that his Glock firearm remained holstered throughout and pointed out that the sound made by a Taser is distinct. He confirmed that police officers are trained to announce “Taser Taser Taser” prior to discharge, but said he had not heard PC Ellie Cook shout this when she deployed her stun gun during the incident.

The officer acknowledged he had previously witnessed a person being struck by a Taser during active duty.

🔴 3:45 UPDATE: COURT RESUMES AS BODY-CAM FOOTAGE REVIEWED

The trial resumed this afternoon with jurors shown body-worn camera footage recorded by PC Lydia Ward.

PC Zachary Marsden, still under cross-examination, was questioned in detail about what he could see and hear at various moments during the incident.

The footage is being used by the defence to test the officer’s awareness of his surroundings as the confrontation unfolded, particularly in relation to Mr Amaaz’s actions and any responses from members of the public.

🔴 3:30 COURT TAKES A BREAK

🔴 3:30: OFFICER AGREES HE STRUCK FIRST DURING ALTERCATION

PC Zachary Marsden accepted during cross-examination that he was the first person to throw a blow in the incident at Manchester Airport.

PUNCH MISSED AS SECOND MAN APPROACHED, COURT HEARS

CCTV footage showed Mr Amaad entering the scene as PC Marsden attempted to strike his brother, the original suspect Amaaz, though the officer confirmed his punch to the youngster brother missed its target.

DEFENCE CHALLENGES BASIS FOR USE OF FORCE

Imran Khan KC put it to the officer that Mr Amaaz had not displayed any violence at that stage. PC Marsden disagreed, stating that the suspect was “resisting” and that he “could feel his muscles already tensing in his arms.”

NO OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN ARREST, SAYS PC

Asked why he had not explained to Mr Amaaz why he was being detained, PC Marsden replied: “I don’t see an opportunity to have a conversation. It had already escalated.”

🔴 3:17 : DEFENCE QUESTIONS USE OF NECK RESTRAINTS

Imran Khan KC challenged PC Zachary Marsden on the use of neck restraint techniques, suggesting that official police training manuals discouraged such methods.

OFFICER ACKNOWLEDGES GUIDANCE, SAYS TECHNIQUE WAS TAUGHT

PC Marsden said he was aware of the guidance but stated that officers had received instruction on how to apply controlled pressure to the neck when necessary to restrain a suspect.

PC MARSDEN DISPUTES CLAIM TECHNIQUE WAS ‘TERRIFYING’

The officer rejected Mr Khan’s suggestion that the act of pushing someone down by the neck would be “terrifying.” He said he did not consider that Mr Amaaz might have been frightened, explaining his focus was on protecting himself and colleagues.

OFFICER SAYS HE WOULD ASSESS WHO WAS GRABBING HIM

Asked how he would personally react if grabbed unexpectedly, PC Marsden told the jury he would instinctively look to see who was grabbing him before responding.

🔴 3:15 UPDATE: CROSS- EXAMINATION CONTINUES

OFFICER ADMITS SUSPECT WOULDN’T HAVE KNOWN HE WAS POLICE AT FIRST CONTACT

Shown a still image from CCTV, PC Zachary Marsden agreed he had not spoken to Mr Amaaz at the point of first contact and acknowledged the suspect would not have known he was a police officer “at this exact moment.”

DEFENCE KC QUESTIONS LACK OF WARNING OR COMMUNICATION

Imran Khan KC, for the defence, probed why no verbal warning or identification had been given. The officer maintained that once Mr Amaaz turned to face him, he had “looked me up and down” and would have clearly seen his police uniform.

OFFICER AGREES SUSPECT DIDN’T RAISE HANDS

The KC suggested that at this stage Mr Amaaz had not raised his hands, which the officer accepted. Later CCTV footage showed PC Marsden pushing the suspect backwards towards the pay station. Mr Khan suggested all three officers then grabbed the defendant.

PC MARSDEN: “I FELT MUSCLES TENSE, HANDS CLENCHED”

PC Marsden said he could feel Mr Amaaz’s muscles beginning to tense and added the suspect had his hands clenched around his mobile phone, which he claimed was later used to strike his colleagues.

“COME ON MATE, WE’RE NOT DOING THAT HERE”

The officer said he was “met with resistance” as he attempted to control the situation, recalling that he told the suspect, “come on mate, we’re not doing that here.”

OFFICER SAYS OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK HAD PASSED

Pressed on why he did not simply ask Mr Amaaz to accompany him, PC Marsden said the opportunity to speak had passed as the suspect was already resisting.

NECK GRIP DID NOT POSE DANGER, OFFICER CLAIMS

When questioned about his decision to place his hands on the back of the suspect’s neck, the officer replied that in his judgement, the grip did not pose any threat to Mr Amaaz’s breathing.

🔴 3:00 THE DEFENCE KC CROSS EXAMINES PC MARSDEN & QUESTIONS HIS DECISION-MAKING

KC questions if PC Marsden had sufficiently verified the account that Mr. Amaaz had in fact headbutted a member of the public. Marsden responds that by leaving the scene, the defendant had changed the situation and made it ‘necessary to locate’ and arrest him.

“Had he remained we could have talked to him. He had chosen to leave,” said PC Marsden.

PC Zachary Marsden told the court he was attacked by the suspect “before I could even talk to him,” as cross-examination continued in the trial of two brothers accused of assaulting officers at Manchester Airport.

The officer agreed that his case was that the force he used during the incident was “justified, proportionate and reasonable.”

Jurors were shown slowed-down CCTV footage of the moments leading up to the confrontation. It showed PC Marsden approaching Mr Amaaz at the pay station without announcing he was a police officer. He confirmed this, explaining that based on the information he had — that the suspect had previously been violent and had “run away” — he had wanted to maintain the element of surprise to prevent another escape or possible assault.

Imran Khan KC, for the defence, pointed out that PC Marsden had two other officers nearby at the time, and questioned why none of them, as shown in the footage, appeared to be monitoring the surrounding crowd. PC Marsden responded that he was concerned about the “risk of conflict within a crowd,” particularly given the allegation that the suspect had already assaulted someone in a crowded environment.

He explained that it was impossible to carry out an arrest without maintaining focus on the subject, and insisted the situation had been “fluid” and required “split-second decision-making.”

The officer said his priority in that moment was to detain the suspect and remove him from the pay station area in order to reduce the risk of escalation.

🔴2:40’UPDATE: CROSS EXAMINATION OF PC ZACHARY MARDEN CONTINUES, WITH THE DEFENCE PUTTING IT TO THE OFFICER THAT HIS APPROACH WAS ‘UNLAWFUL’

The KC challenges that the actions were “unlawful” due to the use of force being “unjustified, disproportionate and not necessary.”

The KC suggests that he shouldn't have grabbed the defendant who at the pay machine and that this was a wrong decision'. Marsden responds: "that's your opinion".

Marden confirms that there was 'reasonable grounds' to make an arrest and that an arrest was ‘necessary’.

The PC noted that the officers had predetermined their course of action prior to exiting the terminal building.

🔴 2:20: COURT BACK IN SESSION

Jurors have returned following lunch break.

🔴 LAST UPDATE BEFORE LUNCH: 1:15

OFFICER DEFENDS DIRECT APPROACH THROUGH CROWD
Shown slowed-down CCTV footage, the officer was asked by defence KC Imran Khan why he had walked between members of the public. PC Zachary Marsden told jurors he took the most “direct route” to the suspect at the Terminal 2 car park pay station, despite acknowledging risks posed by the crowded environment.
Imran Khan KC asks why PC stated that the crowd constituted a risk, PC Marsden replied that there was a risk of the suspect getting violent and the crowd created an environment that was was “obstructed” and included “suitcases” in the way.
Quizzed on his approach, in the light of his own earlier statement in which he cited fears of “close quarter conflict”, the officer said he had still needed to act. He told jurors it was his experience that individuals who had shown violence once were “more likely” to do so again when challenged.
“VIOLENCE TO ME”: OFFICER SAYS DECISION WAS REASONABLE
When the KC implied that logic might apply to the officer himself, Judge Flewitt intervened, calling the line of questioning “illogical”.
PC Marsden said he had followed the national decision model and worked to “mitigate” the risks involved. Asked whether his decision ultimately “led to violence”, he replied: “Yes, unfortunately it did lead to violence — to me.”

The jury was then dismissed for lunch.

🔴 12:54 UPDATE: OFFICER JUSTIFIES HIS APPROACH.

ARREST IN CROWD RISKED ESCALATION

PC Zachary Marsden told the court that effecting an arrest in a public crowd presents operational risks, and he believed removing the suspect from the scene was the safest option.

BODY-CAM SHOWS ARMED OFFICER APPROACHING IN WIDE ARC

Shown his own body-worn footage, PC Marsden confirmed he had approached the Terminal 2 car park pay station in a wide arc to assess the situation before moving in.

He said his decision to remove Mr Amaaz from the crowded space was shaped by experience. “Effecting an arrest in a crowd presents its own risks,” he said. “I had to remove this male from the crowd.”

CROWD COULD COMPLICATE ARREST, OFFICER SAYS

The officer told jurors that arrests in public can “heighten the crowd dynamic” and that suspects may “play up to the crowd”. He stressed he did not believe the crowd posed a violent threat, but said the area was “densely populated with obstacles,” and it would have been harder to monitor developing risks.

Asked by the defence whether this was a protest or a threatening group, the officer agreed it was not, describing it instead as a “busy location” where people were paying for parking.

SPLIT-SECOND CHOICES AND UNWRITTEN COORDINATION

When questioned about whether he paused to brief colleagues before acting, PC Marsden said his team worked closely and often communicated without words.

“We do this very often. It’s often unspoken,” he said, adding that armed officers regularly removed passengers from aircraft as part of routine operations.

Pressed on the dangers of entering a crowd while carrying a loaded firearm, PC Marsden agreed: “It is a risk.”

🔴 COURT RETURNS. 12:25 UPDATE: FOOTAGE SHOWS ALLEGED VICTIM DID NOT WANT TO PRESS CHARGES

Jurors have been shown further footage capturing Mr Ismaeil — the man said to have been assaulted at Manchester Airport — telling officers he did not wish to pursue the matter.

The footage, played in court, shows Mr Ismaeil saying he didn’t want “any trouble” after the alleged attack, in which he had initially claimed to have been headbutted in the face by a male in a blue tracksuit.

CCTV SHOWS SUSPECT LEAVING TERMINAL WITH FAMILY MEMBERS

Earlier, jurors were shown CCTV which captured the man identified as Mr Amaaz — wearing blue — walking out of Terminal 2. He is seen with his brother Mr Amaad, their mother, and a child as they head towards the nearby car park pay station.

PC Zachary Marsden, who was on duty as an armed officer that evening, told the court he had not been provided with that CCTV footage at the time but accepted that it would have assisted him in his response.

OFFICER CONSIDERED ARREST FOR ACTUAL BODILY HARM

PC Marsden confirmed he had planned to arrest Mr Amaaz on suspicion of assault occasioning actual bodily harm (ABH), based on the information he had received from Mr Ismaeil at Starbucks.

He described how Mr Ismaeil had covered his mouth and appeared distressed, telling the officer he had been headbutted.

BODY-CAM FOOTAGE SHOWS POLICE DOWNPLAYING SEVERITY OF ALLEGED ASSAULT

Jurors were also shown later body-worn camera footage from PC Marsden and another officer, PC Bradbury.

In it, Mr Marsden is heard describing the incident as “common assault at best” — a less serious allegation than ABH.

Under cross-examination, Mr Marsden explained that he had re-engaged with Mr Ismaeil to “gauge his level of support” and noticed that he showed no obvious signs of injury.

DEFENCE CLAIMS OFFICER LIED ABOUT ARREST PLAN — PC DENIES

Imran Khan KC, representing Mr Amaaz, suggested to PC Marsden that he had not been truthful about how the arrest was planned.

The barrister claimed the officer was not being honest in describing an earlier conversation with his colleagues about who would carry out the arrest.

PC Marsden disagreed, maintaining that a clear plan had been made beforehand: he would carry out the arrest, and a colleague would be responsible for transporting the suspect away.

🔴 11:58 : COURT TAKES A BREAK

🔴 11:54 UPDATE: KC PRESSES OFFICER ON EARLY ENGAGEMENT WITH SUSPECT

Mr Khan KC continued to challenge PC Marsden’s approach, questioning whether the officer had done enough to engage the suspect before attempting arrest.

The officer responded:

“It’s unfortunate I was not able to engage the man in blue because he attacked me before I managed to engage him.”

‘ONE SUSPECT’ FROM INITIAL REPORT, SAYS PC MARSDEN

The barrister suggested the officer failed to ask whether anyone else might have been involved.

PC Marsden replied that all information at the time — including from Mr Ismaeil at Starbucks — indicated there was a single suspect who had already fled the scene.

🔴 11:34 UPDATE: OFFICER QUESTIONED OVER IOPC INTERVIEW ASSAULT ALLEGATION

PC Marsden confirmed to the jury that his Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) interview was split into two parts — the first dealing with a criminal allegation and the second relating to disciplinary matters.

The criminal allegation was that he had used “excessive force amounting to assault”.

He told the jury he gave a prepared statement, but then answered no further questions, instead responding “no comment”.

FOCUS SHIFTED FROM WITNESS TO SUSPECT PURSUIT

The officer said that at Starbucks, Mr Ismaeil told him the suspect had already “made off” in the direction of the car park.

PC Marsden said he left other officers to speak with Mr Ismaeil while he focused on locating the fleeing suspect.

As he approached the exit doors to the Terminal 2 car park, the control room relayed that a man matching the description — in blue shorts — had been seen running toward the car park area.

ESCAPE RISK GUIDED DECISION TO ACT FAST

Marsden told the jury it was more urgent to intercept the suspect than to continue gathering background information.

“There was a risk of escape,” he said. “He could have been on the motorway within minutes.”

At this point, Judge Flewitt interjected, advising Mr Khan KC that questions should focus on what the officer ought to have done differently — rather than challenging why he pursued the suspect.

DEFENCE QUESTIONS POLICING PRIORITIES

Mr Khan suggested the officer should have first asked the control room to check CCTV from Starbucks, but PC Marsden explained that footage from Starbucks was held on a separate system and not part of the airport’s central CCTV network.

The barrister argued that it should have been “of critical importance” to establish whether the suspect was acting alone.

PC Marsden said he was acting on clear and urgent information — from both Mr Ismaeil and the control room — identifying a man in a blue tracksuit as the assault suspect.

🔴11:17 PC MARSDEN QUESTIONED ON EARLY STATEMENT AFTER ATTACK

PC Zachary Marsden confirmed in court that he wrote a police statement shortly after the incident, while events were still fresh in his mind. He told the jury this statement was produced “just after I had been attacked” and described it as accurate to “the best of my abilities”, despite having “been struck 17 times.”

The officer also confirmed he later produced a more detailed 14-page statement for the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC).

The barrister Imran Khan KC challenged discrepancies in the officer’s account, suggesting that in his initial statement, the key information about a headbutt had been attributed to Mr Ismaeil’s friend, not Mr Ismaeil himself.

PC Marsden stood by his recollection, stating that Mr Ismaeil told him directly he had been headbutted. The officer added that Mr Ismaeil had been “holding his mouth” at the time, and only afterward did his friend begin to provide additional information.

🔴 11:13 :OFFICER QUESTIONED ON LACK OF CONTEMPORANEOUS RECORDS

PC Zachary Marsden faced scrutiny over the limited availability of contemporaneous records documenting his actions during the incident.

Under questioning, the officer confirmed he initially responded to reports of “two Asian males fighting”and attended the Starbucks area with PC Ellie Cook. He acknowledged speaking directly to Mr Ismaeil — the man reportedly involved in the altercation — but confirmed his body-worn camera was switched off during the exchange.

The court heard that officers are encouraged to carry notebooks and use them to record details that may later support court proceedings. PC Marsden agreed such notes can form part of official evidence.

He said he had access to an electronic pocket notebook but claimed it was “not practicable” to make entries during the incident due to how rapidly events unfolded.

Asked whether he could have recorded details the following day, PC Marsden replied: “Unfortunately, I was suspended.” He explained that after the incident, he returned to the police station to complete a formal statement, which he believed was sufficient.

🔴 10:46: AIRPORT STAFFING WAS “NOT A LOT”, OFFICER SAYS

Under cross-examination, PC Marsden outlined the staffing situation at Manchester Airport on the night of the incident. He confirmed he was working a 12-hour shift, from 7pm to 7am, alongside PC Ellie Cook in an armed response vehicle.

He told the court his firearms team comprised six officers and agreed there was a police station between Terminals 1 and 3. Asked about overall staffing levels, PC Marsden said: “I would not describe it as a lot.”

Some officers at the airport carried only incapacitant spray, while others were armed. Firearms officers, he said, could be identified by a red asterisk on their uniforms. He also confirmed the presence of a CCTV control room, although it was “not routinely staffed.”

The court heard PC Marsden had received training in the police Code of Ethics and understood the professional standards expected of him.
🔴10:38: PC MARSDEN: OFFICERS MUST OBEY THE LAW OR FACE CONSEQUENCES

Under cross-examination, PC Marsden agreed police must follow the law at all times and can face criminal or civil action if they do not.

Mr Khan KC asked whether he was aware of officers selling drugs, prompting an objection from the prosecution. Responding to a revised question, PC Marsden said he had never encountered police misconduct.

He described his own conduct on the day as “professional” and rejected the suggestion his actions fell below police standards. He also confirmed officers are required to challenge colleagues if they witness misconduct.

Judge Flewitt advised the defence that questions about others’ conduct should be held until relevant CCTV clips are reviewed.

🔴 10:24: PC MARSDEN PRESSED ON POLICE POWERS AND TRAINING

Mr Khan suggested that certain restraint techniques should only be used after specific training.

Pressed by the judge to respond clearly, PC Marsden said that in his understanding, the official training manuals were “guidance” rather than strict instruction.

The officer confirmed he had received a wide range of training, including:

• Personal safety and conflict training

• Use of force and medical implications of restraint

• Use of firearms and Taser

• Human rights and legal training

• National decision-making model

• Control, arrest, and detention

PC Marsden agreed that, as a serving police officer, he holds “quite significant powers” and is legally permitted to use force where appropriate.

🔴 10:20: DEFENCE KC SAYS OFFICER USED ‘UNLAWFUL FORCE’

Mr Khan KC put it to PC Marsden that he had made a series of decisions “not in accordance with your training”, suggesting his conduct fell below that expected of a professional police officer.

He went on to claim that the officer had used “unlawful force” during the incident.

PC Marsden confirmed he had previously worked with Lancashire Police before joining GMP, and had become a firearms officer in April 2023.

He agreed officers regularly deal with members of the public who are “angry and annoyed”.

🔴 10:12: JURY RETURNS AS CROSS-EXAMINATION BEGINS

Jurors have been brought back into court as proceedings resume.

PC Zachary Marsden has returned to the witness box and is now being cross-examined by Imran Khan KC, representing the defendant Mr Amaaz.

🔴 4:41: DAY 5 ENDS. Court adjourns. The jury has discharged and will return at 10am tomorrow, when armed officer PC Zachary Marsden is expected to face cross-examination.

🔴 4:41: OFFICER TAKEN TO HOSPITAL WITH HEAD INJURIES AFTER ATTACK

PC Zachary Marsden told the jury he suffered swelling to both ears, sharp jaw pain and small cuts to his neck following the altercation at Manchester Airport.

He said the pain in his jaw was “excruciating”, prompting a visit to Wythenshawe Hospital for treatment.

EAR PAIN WORSENED, SPEECH AFFECTED, COURT HEARS

Three days after the incident, the officer returned to hospital due to worsening pain in his ears — “so much so I couldn’t touch them,” he said.

PC Marsden also described ongoing fatigue, difficulty concentrating, and impaired speech in the days that followed.
🔴 4:40: STAMP TO CATCH RADIO WIRE, NOT SUSPECT, OFFICER SAYS

PC Zachary Marsden told jurors he stamped his foot downward in an effort to catch the wire of his fallen police radio. He believed he missed the wire but was certain he “did not make contact” with Mr Amaaz.

MOTHER INTERVENED DURING ARREST, COURT HEARS

As he tried to arrest the suspect, PC Marsden said the defendants’ mother began pulling him over Mr Amaaz.

“She grabbed my left leg and started to pull me over,” he told the jury.

“She continued to pull me… I told her to get off.”

He said she also reached for a second radio on his vest, while the prone Mr Amaaz grabbed at the first fallen radio. At that moment, PC Ellie Cook screamed in his ear:

“I’ve got control.”

TASER WIRES ENTANGLED LEGS AS RADIO CALLS WENT UNANSWERED

PC Marsden said wires from a deployed Taser had tangled his legs, and although he tried to shout for help by screaming into the radio, “nobody appeared to respond.”

He said that after Mr Amaaz and his brother were detained, he helped escort them out of the pay station area. He reloaded his Taser and went back inside.

STAND-OFF OUTSIDE PAY STATION; PEPPER SPRAY USED

Returning to the scene, PC Marsden described a new stand-off involving three other males. One, he said, was pointing his phone at officers’ faces, while being shielded by two others.

PC Mark Flanagan, another officer at the scene, pointed a Taser at the obstructive male and indicated he intended to arrest him. PC Marsden said he then stepped in and used pepper spray on the individual so the arrest could be made.

USE OF FORCE ‘JUSTIFIED’, SAYS ARMED OFFICER

Asked to justify his actions, PC Marsden explained that pepper spray is “not always effective” and must be followed by another control tactic if necessary.

He said he “struggled to get the suspect down to the ground”, but was able to detain him.

🔴 4:28: OFFICER DENIES KICK WAS RETALIATION: “I DIDN’T LOSE MY TEMPER”

PC Zachary Marsden firmly rejected the suggestion that his kick to the suspect’s face was driven by revenge after being attacked.

NO LOSS OF CONTROL, SAYS FIREARMS OFFICER

Asked by prosecutor Paul Greaney KC whether he acted out of retaliation, PC Marsden replied:

“I would strongly dispute that or disagree.”

He added:

“That would be false. I don’t believe I lost my temper or was angry.”

STEP BACK TAKEN AFTER OBSERVING SUSPECT MOVE

The officer told the jury the male on the ground had brought his hands up to his face, at which point PC Marsden said he “stepped back to assess any behaviour change.”

EMERGENCY RADIO ALERT: A ‘LIFE OR DEATH’ MOMENT

PC Marsden also confirmed he had pressed the emergency panic button on his radio, signalling to colleagues that the situation was critical.

“That alert tells everyone this is a life or death situation,” he said, adding that he had never before used the distress function in active duty.

🔴 4:22 : OFFICER EXPLAINS PURPOSE BEHIND KICK TO FACE: “I HAD TO STOP IT”

PC Zachary Marsden told jurors he considered his remaining tactical options after delivering a Taser shot to the larger male, Amaad, and seeing the stun gun’s cartridges were spent.

He said he assessed—but ruled out—using pepper spray or his firearm, citing safety and practicality. Drawing his loaded Glock, he explained, was inappropriate due to the risk to life in a chaotic environment.

Exhausted and injured after what he described as a sustained assault, PC Marsden said he believed the man on the ground—Amaaz—was attempting to get back up and continue the attack.

“I firmly believed if he got up I could not stop another attack and he could quite easily overpower me,” he told the court.

“I was exhausted, I didn’t have the energy to continue that fight. I had to stop it.”

He said the situation demanded a swift decision, and so he delivered “one strike to the facial region” using the soft laces of his boot. His intention, he said, was to stun the suspect and buy vital seconds to regain control of the scene.

“I was hoping it would dissuade the suspect from trying to get up again,” he said.

🔴 4:03: COURT HAS RESUMED.

The jury has returned to court after a short break. Prosecutor Paul Greaney KC resumes his questioning of PC Zachary Marsden, who continues to give evidence about the events in the Terminal 2 car park at Manchester Airport.
🔴 3:35: SHORT BREAK

Court will reconvene after a short pause.

🔴 3:35: “THAT CROWD WAS HOSTILE. NOBODY WANTED TO HELP US AND INSTEAD WATCHED”

PC Zachary Marsden told the jury he feared his colleagues had been “incapacitated” as none were able to assist him while he was “being attacked” in the Terminal 2 car park pay station.
Asked how he felt when he realised no member of the public was intervening, PC Marsden said:

“That crowd was hostile. Nobody wanted to help us and instead watched.”

ARMED OFFICER KICKED MAN ON GROUND DURING CHAOS, COURT HEARS

PC Marsden said he feared there was a “third attacker” involved and believed they were attempting to “strangle” him.

In response, he said he delivered a kick to a man on the ground, before attempting to arrest him.

He told the jury that he only stopped when his colleague PC Ellie Cook said she had “the situation under control.”

PC Marsden said he had not known the man on the ground had been Tasered moments earlier.
🔴 3:25: ARMED OFFICER SAYS HE CHOSE TASER OVER PISTOL AS BLOWS RAINED DOWN
PC MARSDEN FEARED BEING KNOCKED UNCONSCIOUS BY PUNCHES TO THE JAW

The armed officer told the jury he felt his head “bounced from one side to the other” as punches rained down inside the Terminal 2 car park pay station. He said he felt no pain at the time due to a rush of adrenaline.

“I clenched my jaw and put my head down,” he said. “If a punch connected with my jaw, it would be broken almost instantly.” He feared he would be rendered unconscious while still struggling to control the suspect.

TASER USED AS A ‘LESS LETHAL OPTION’ — BUT DIDN’T WORK FULLY

PC Marsden said he opted to use his Taser rather than his loaded Glock pistol, calling it the “less lethal option”. His aim, he said, was to incapacitate the suspect for five seconds with a 50,000-volt jolt and “regain control”.

He said someone was “pulling” at his Taser as he drew it — but he managed to fire the stun gun at Mr Amaaz’s upper chest during a brief gap in the assault. However, he said the shot was not fully effective and a follow-up discharge was needed. Before he could fire again, he said, “someone punched me from behind.”

“DISTINCTIVE” BLOW KNOCKED HIM TO THE GROUND — OFFICER FEARED WEAPON USE

The officer described the blow from behind as “distinctively different” — sharp and concentrated — and said it sent him crashing to the floor.

He then received “multiple” further strikes. “My initial thought was that this person could have some sort of weapon,” he said. “My fear was this was some sort of knuckle-duster.”

“This violence was now escalating even further,” he said. “I could feel I was on the floor with my knees pressed against a bench and I needed to get back up.”

He told the jury he did manage to get to his feet — but the person who struck him was “still on my back.”

🔴 3:16 ARMED OFFICER FELT ‘EXTREMELY VULNERABLE’ AS HE WAS PUNCHED, BLINDED & FILMED

PC Zachary Marsden told jurors he felt “extremely vulnerable” during the confrontation at the Terminal 2 car park pay station.

“I was in a position where I could be overpowered,” he said, “and there was virtually nothing I could do to stop it.”

The armed officer said his fear throughout was that his firearm could be taken from him — a threat that persisted until “we had the situation under control.”

“I was being punched in the face, I didn’t have my glasses, and I couldn’t see anything,” he said. He added that his glasses, which had been knocked off during the attack, were later retrieved and were the same pair he wore while giving evidence in court.

PC Marsden also told the jury that no members of the public stepped in to help during the incident. Instead, he said, people in the pay station appeared to be filming the violent confrontation on their phones.

🔴 3:10: OFFICER MARSDEN DESCRIBES STRIKES FROM SECOND BROTHER: ‘HARDEST PUNCHES I’VE EVER FELT IN MY LIFE’

PC Zachary Marsden told the jury that the punches he received during the incident were “the hardest I’ve ever felt in my life.”
He said the blows were coming from the “larger male,” identified in court as Amaad, and that they were all delivered with a clenched fist, each one landing to his head.
“I can confidently say these were the hardest I’ve ever felt in my life,” said the officer, adding that although he had previously been punched in the line of duty, this experience was more severe.

The officer said the impact caused his glasses to fly from his face. He explained that he is short-sighted and could not see clearly beyond an arm’s length without them. The glasses were recovered later, and he confirmed they were the same pair he was wearing in the witness box.
🔴2:59 OFFICER PINNED IN CORNER — BLOWS RAINED DOWN

PC Zachary Marsden told the jury he became wedged in a corner of the Terminal 2 car park pay station and felt “vulnerable to attack and unable to attack.”

The armed officer said he realised the man behind him was significantly larger. As he struggled to restrain the original suspect, he attempted to strike him with a right fist towards the “facial region” in an effort to stun and gain “time and space” — but said the punch missed.

Instead, the larger male behind him continued to “close me down,” PC Marsden said, describing how his body armour was grabbed and he was pulled with force across the area.

“I was almost in front of the benches,” he said. “That’s when I started receiving the blows from all directions. I was pinned against the benches.”
🔴 2:52 UPDATE: ARMED OFFICER FEARED “SOMEONE WAS TRYING TO GET TO MY GUN”

PC Zachary Marsden told jurors he tried to place the suspect’s arms in a ‘stacked position’ to apply handcuffs, but said this “didn’t work.” He described the man pushing backwards off the pay station machine, and said he began “losing control.”

In an attempt to restrain him, PC Marsden said he pushed the man forward and “controlled his head” to bend him 90 degrees. He explained: “The information I had was that he had used his head as a weapon to headbutt someone. We were in close proximity and I didn’t want to be headbutted.”

As the struggle continued, the officer described feeling a sudden and intense pressure from the right-hand side.

“Around this time I felt immense pressure and weight of someone who had approached from my right,” he said. “I felt my pistol being moved across my front. My fear was that someone was trying to get to my gun, causing it to move around my thigh and the rest of my body.”

Pressed by prosecutor Paul Greaney KC on what this meant, the officer replied: “If someone gains access to my firearm it would cause an immediate lethal threat to anyone in the vicinity.”

PC Marsden described feeling “two hands clasping” at his right side and said the weight coming over his shoulder told him “they were bigger than me.” He said he had no idea who it was and added: “I had to get out of this position quickly.”

He concluded: “I now knew there was more than one person involved here.”
🔴 2:41 pm :ARMED OFFICER TRIED TO WALK SUSPECT OUT OF PAY STATION

PC Zachary Marsden tells the jury he chose to take hold of the suspect and walk him out of the pay station to a safer location. He says this was “the safest option” for everyone present, including colleagues and bystanders, in case the suspect became combative.

He attempted what he called a “two-point escort,” which involved taking hold of the man’s left arm. This, he said, was what officers are trained to do.

“IMMEDIATELY I WAS MET WITH RESISTANCE,” OFFICER SAYS

The officer tells the jury he placed his hands on the suspect to begin the manoeuvre — but was instantly met with resistance.

“As he’s turned to look at me, he’s clenched his fists and I could feel his muscles clenching,” said PC Marsden. “I feared he was going to become violent and resistant.”

He recalled using calm language, saying something like “Come on mate, we’re not doing that here,” in an effort to de-escalate.

OFFICER: SUSPECT KNEW I WAS POLICE, NO NEED TO SAY IT

PC Marsden says he didn’t inform the man he was a police officer because the suspect “turned and saw” that he was in full uniform.

The officer says he then changed his plan: he moved to place the man’s hands behind his back in order to handcuff him and walk him out of the area safely.
🔴2:38 pm: FIREARMS OFFICER WEIGHED SIX ARREST OPTIONS — BUT ‘ONLY ONE SEEMED APPROPRIATE’

PC Zachary Marsden tells the jury he carefully considered six possible options after identifying the suspect inside the Terminal 2 car park pay station.

The first was to announce himself so the public would be aware he was a police officer. The second was to approach the suspect and try to “come to some sort of agreement” about how the arrest would take place.

The third option was to arrest the man immediately in the pay station, while the fourth involved moving him to a less crowded area with radio signal and officer support.

A fifth option was to wait until the man moved further into the car park — a riskier setting with no backup and moving traffic.

The final option, PC Marsden says, was “to do nothing at all”. He tells the jury only one of the six options felt appropriate in the moment.
🔴 2:31 : OFFICER TELLS COURT OF CHALLENGES AS SUSPECT SPOTTED IN PAY STATION COMMUNICATION ‘BLACKOUT ZONE’,

The police officer searching for the suspect in the aftermath of the Starbucks incident at Manchester Airport located a man “who distinctively matched the description” given over the radio inside the Terminal 2 car park pay station.

PC Zachary Marsden told the court he identified the man in an area already becoming crowded. He described observing a “dense group” of people and a “developing crowd dynamic” as he moved in, adding that the level of background noise made it “not practicable to work” in the space.

The officer also explained that the pay station is located in what he described as a known radio “signal blackout” zone, meaning communications were limited. He said he was concerned about being “cut off” from other units, including colleagues who were still at Starbucks, and added that from his location, he was “out of sight” from them entirely.
🔴2:26: COURT BACK IN SESSION

The jurors return to court as proceedings resume. Prosecutor Paul Greaney KC is now continuing his questioning of armed response officer PC Zachary Marsden, positioned in the witness box.
🔴 1:19 ⏸️ Court has now broken for lunch. Proceedings are due to resume at 2:05pm.
🔴 1:17 BODY CAM ‘PRIMED TO RECORD’ AS OFFICER APPROACHED SUSPECT

PC Marsden told the jury he placed his body-worn camera on standby as he exited Terminal 2, explaining it was “primed to record should I need to capture any evidence.”

He confirmed the device automatically began recording once activated during the incident.

🔴 1:10: OFFICER EXPLAINS DECISION TO ARREST ASSAULT SUSPECT

PC Marsden told the court that he planned to arrest the man in the blue tracksuit on suspicion of assault. When asked if the arrest was necessary, he said: “I believe it was essential to prevent the suspect’s disappearance, to protect the victim from further harm, and to enable a prompt investigation.”

He explained that, along with PCs Cook and Ward, he proceeded towards the Terminal 2 car park to locate the suspect.

Before reaching the pay station, control room updated them that the suspect was wearing blue shorts.

The officers received confirmation that the suspect had been seen heading towards the car park.

PC Marsden said the team discussed their approach in case of a positive arrest.

He was designated the arresting officer, while PC Lydia Ward would be responsible for transporting the detainee in a police van.

🔴 12:54: ARMED OFFICER RESPONDED TO ‘GRADE 1’ EMERGENCY OVER STARBUCKS INCIDENT

PC Zachary Marsden tells the jury he and fellow firearms officer PC Ellie Cook were on routine armed patrol at Manchester Airport when they were dispatched at 8:20pm to a ‘Grade 1’ emergency — the highest priority call — following reports of a fight involving two Asian males at Terminal 2.

Control relayed that one male was wearing black and the other a blue tracksuit.

Arriving at Starbucks, PC Marsden said he spoke to the man in black — later identified as passenger Ismaeil Abdulkareem — who reported there had been a dispute on the flight involving an elderly Asian woman, and that it had continued into the baggage reclaim hall.

Mr Abdulkareem told the officer he had been headbutted by a young man in a blue tracksuit, who then ran off towards the car park.

PC Marsden said: “We needed to locate where this suspect was,” and confirmed their intention was to arrest the man in blue — Mohammed Fahir Amaaz — on suspicion of assault.

🔴 12:50 UPDATE: ARMED OFFICER WAS CARRYING LOADED GLOCK WITH ROUND IN CHAMBER

PC Zachary Marsden tells the jury he had been a firearms officer for 15 months at the time of the incident and had passed his training on the first attempt.

He was part of Team Three Armed Response based at Manchester Airport and was wearing the full operational uniform unique to firearms officers — a uniform he described as “very distinct,” adding he would expect members of the public to recognise him clearly as a police officer.

He confirms he was equipped with handcuffs, baton, incapacitant spray, a Taser stun gun — and a Glock 17 semi-automatic pistol, fully loaded with two magazines of 16 rounds each and one round chambered, “ready to use”.

The weapon was holstered on his right hip throughout the incident.
🔴 WE’RE BACK: POLICE WITNESS SWORN IN

After a short break, jurors are brought back into court as proceedings resume at Liverpool Crown Court.

New witness: PC Zachary Marsden, involved in the incident where officers came under attack. An authorised firearms officer with Greater Manchester Police. Dressed in a suit, he is sworn in and confirms he had served for five-and-a-half years at the time of the incident.

🔴 DAY 6 - MONDAY 7th JULY

LIVE UPDATES CONTINUE:

🔴 12:14 SHORT COURTROOM BREAK

Proceedings have paused briefly. The jury and court will return shortly as the trial continues at Liverpool Crown Court. Stay with us for the latest updates.
🔴12:11 UPDATE: BODY-CAM FOOTAGE PLAYED FROM FOUR OFFICERS AT SCENE

Jurors are shown body-worn camera footage from four police officers who responded to the violence at Manchester Airport’s Terminal 2 car park pay station.

DS Danielle Bullivant confirms there is no audio on the CCTV, but the body-cam footage includes sound — except for the first 30 seconds, which is muted by default.

The court begins with footage from PC Marsden. Audio captures shouting before the footage abruptly ends — the camera was damaged during the confrontation, jurors are told.

Next, PC Cook’s body-cam shows her screaming for Mr Amaaz to “get down now”, while another unidentified voice shouts “you piece of s—t.”

PC Ward’s body-cam is also played. She can be heard crying, having suffered a broken nose in the attack.

Footage from PC Flanagan, who arrived mid-incident, captures him shouting:

“You f—ng move I’ll smash your face in, do you understand?”*

He is also heard repeating:

“You f—ing piece of s—t”

as he lifts defendant Mr Amaad from the ground.

🔴 THREE OTHER MEN AT SCENE AS PEPPER SPRAY DEPLOYED

Jurors are told the CCTV captures three other men at the scene:

Ali Rahman (grey sweatshirt), Sahid Rahman (navy top), and Ishan Rahman (red T-shirt).

PC Marsden is seen pushing the three men away, the court hears.

The footage also shows PC Marsden deploying pepper spray towards Ali Rahman, DS Bullivant confirms.
The incident is then shown again from a second CCTV angle, captured from the opposite side of the Terminal 2 car park pay station.
🔴 11:44AM – OFFICER SEEN WITH BLOODIED NOSE AS BACKUP ARRIVES

PC Marsden is seen picking up his dropped radio and pressing the emergency button to summon help, DS Bullivant tells the jury.
Footage shows Mr Amaad with his hands behind his head, while PC Marsden stands holding a Taser.

PCs Flanagan and Clewarth then arrive at the pay station, followed by CCTV capturing Mr Amaaz face down on the ground with his hands behind his back.

Their mother is also seen on the footage, jurors hear.

PC WARD IS VISIBLY DISTRESSED WITH BLOOD COMING FROM HER NOSE, the court is told.

🔴 11:43AM – TASER FIRED BY PC ELLIE COOK AS AMAAZ GRAPPLES OFFICERS, COURT HEARS. Kick to head of Amaaz and ‘stamp’ that “does not appear to connect.”

The jury hears that PC Cook discharged her Taser at Mr Amaaz just as he appeared to have his arm around PC Marsden’s neck.

Moments later, both men fell to the ground, DS Bullivant tells the court.

As PC Marsden got back to his feet — his radio seen dangling beneath his body armour — he delivered a kick to Mr Amaaz, followed by what appeared to be a stamp aimed at his head.

However, the officer confirms to the jury that the stamp “does not appear to connect.”

🔴 11:35am – Jury Walked Through Further Blows at Police & Officer’s Drawing Of Taser:

Detective Sergeant Danielle Bullivant continues guiding the jury through the violent altercation at the Terminal 2 pay station — breaking down the incident blow by blow.

She tells the court that:

– PC Cook was struck twice by Mr Amaaz — first a punch to the head, then a blow to the torso

– Two more punches were aimed at her — one landed, another missed

– PC Marsden stood up and drew his Taser, and looks towards Mr Amaad, the older brother, who had his arms raised— but the officer was then punched in the head by Mr Amaaz, - the eighth strike logged

– That blow forced PC Marsden backwards, the witness says

– Two more punches followed — the ninth and tenth by Mr Amaaz, aimed at Marsden

The officer confirms this moment was chaotic, but each frame of CCTV is now being examined for clarity.

🔴 11:22am – Punches & Elbow Strikes: Continued Breakdown of Police Assault

The jury hears Det Sgt Bullivant give detailed commentary on the alleged sequence of strikes delivered by Mr Amaaz during the car park altercation.

Following “punch one,” she identifies:

– Punch two, three and four aimed at PC Marsden

– First elbow strike at PC Cook, causing her head to jolt back and her hat to fly off

– Fifth punch at PC Marsden

– Second elbow strike at PC Cook

– A final swing with a phone in hand, said to knock PC Ward to the ground.

All actions were visible on the CCTV footage under analysis in court.

🔴 11:16am – ‘Punch One’: Jury Hears Start of Alleged Police Assault

Det Sgt Danielle Bullivant describes the moment the violence began at the car park pay station. She confirms PC Marsden and PC Cook were armed, while PC Ward was unarmed.

Jurors hear how Mr Amaaz, seen on CCTV at the pay station, allegedly threw the first punch at PC Marsden as the officer was pushed back toward seating. The moment is referred to in court as “punch one” — the first of several blows analysed by a police use-of-force expert.

🔴 11:10am – Officer Returns to Explain Key CCTV Stills

Detective Sergeant Danielle Bullivant resumes her evidence, guiding jurors through CCTV stills. She describes how the defendants left Terminal 2 and were approached by three officers at the car park pay station. While she narrates the footage, she agrees with the defence barrister that the ultimate interpretation is for the jury to decide.

🔴 11:06am – Jury Shown Timeline of Events

Proceedings begin slightly behind schedule, with Judge Flewitt apologising to jurors for the late start, citing delays in an earlier matter. Prosecutor Adam Birkby directs the jury to review a “sequence of events” chart summarising key stages of the case.

🔴 Day 6 Begins: Jury Returns for Another Week of Evidence

The jurors are back in court as proceedings resume. Several key witnesses are still to be heard this week. While some structure is anticipated, the exact order of witnesses may remain fluid — the judge retains full discretion over how the trial unfolds.

———

🔴 1:00pm UPDATE: DAY ONE UNDERWAY

Liverpool Crown Court in session, Mohammed Fahir Amaaz & Muhammad Amaad currently maintaining not guilty pleas. Judge Flewitt KC presiding. Defence led by Imran Khan KC. Proceedings ongoing—stay tuned for live updates.
🔴 4pm UPDATE: JURY SELECTION

Preliminary jury selection today at Liverpool Crown Court. His Honour Judge Flewitt KC instructed candidates to ignore all media commentary. Final selection & swearing-in scheduled for Wednesday.

🔴 WEDNESDAY 2ND JULY 12 MIDDAY UPDATE : JURY EMPANELMENT

Jury selection now being finalised at Liverpool Crown Court. Proceedings focus on ensuring a fair and impartial panel to judge solely on courtroom evidence, before His Honour Judge Flewitt KC.

🔴 3.40 PM UPDATE: JURY SWORN IN

A jury panel has been sworn in at Liverpool Crown Court. Judge Flewitt KC issued strict directions on impartiality, warning jurors not to read press or search online. The prosecution is expected to open its case Thursday afternoon.

🔴 MANCHESTER AIRPORT TRIAL : DAY 4

Jury now seated at Liverpool Crown Court. Opening arguments expected today in the case against Mohammed Fahir Amaaz & Muhammad Amaad. Stay tuned for updates.

🔴 MANCHESTER AIRPORT TRIAL: DAY 4 UPDATES

Judge Neil Flewitt KC, has just confirmed that the CPS prosecution will formally open the case this afternoon, as there are still outstanding legal issues to resolve this morning, stay tuned ⬇️

🔴 MANCHESTER AIRPORT TRIAL: DAY 4 UPDATES

Jury now sworn in at Liverpool Crown Court. This morning's Legal preamble finally concluded ahead of the CPS opening its case, this afternoon. Stay tuned, key developments live as they happen. ⬇️

🔴 DAY 5 UPDATE: 10:52am – COURT ASSEMBLES

The defendants, Mohammed Fahir Amaaz, 20, and Muhammad Amaad, 26, are seated in the dock wearing formal court attire. Both are charged in connection with alleged assaults at Manchester Airport and formally deny all allegations.

This morning marks the start of the prosecution’s case. A jury of eight men and four women has been brought into court. Paul Greaney KC appears for the Crown. Mr Amaaz is represented by Imran Khan KC, while Chloe Gardner appears for Mr Amaad.

As is standard at the outset of a Crown Court trial, the prosecution will now outline the case to the jury, setting out the alleged facts and legal framework before any evidence is presented.

🔴 11:07am – CROWN OUTLINES ALLEGED ASSAULT IN TERMINAL STARBUCKS

Prosecutor Paul Greaney KC has opened the Crown’s case at Liverpool Crown Court, setting out the prosecution’s account of events the jury will be asked to consider.

He told jurors:

“The two defendants are Mohammed Fahir Amaaz, who is aged 20, and Muhammed Amaad, who is aged 26. They are brothers. On 23rd July 2024, they travelled by car to Manchester Airport in order to collect their mother who was due to arrive back in the United Kingdom on a flight from Qatar. They had with them their young nephew.”

Another passenger, Abdulkareem Ismaeil, was on the same flight as their mother.

“He was travelling with his wife and three young children. It is clear that on the flight and/or shortly after it landed, something happened between the defendants’ mother and Abdulkareem Ismaeil that made the defendants’ mother unhappy.”

The prosecution say that when the group passed a Starbucks in Terminal 2, the mother pointed Mr Ismaeil out to her sons.

“At just after 8.20pm, the defendants entered Starbucks and confronted Abdulkareem Ismaeil. During that confrontation, Mohammed Fahir Amaaz (the first defendant) delivered a headbutt to the face of Abdulkareem Ismaeil and punched him, then attempted to deliver other blows, all in front of a number of children.”

Mr Greaney told jurors this led to a charge of assault by beating, and described it as “obviously unlawful conduct.”

Access to the Law:

In criminal law, self-defence can be a complete defence to assault. If the jury finds the force used was reasonable in the circumstances, the defendants must be acquitted.

🔴 11:15am – CROWN OUTLINES AIRPORT POLICE ALTERCATION

Paul Greaney KC continued his opening remarks by describing the confrontation that followed the Starbucks incident, which the prosecution alleges involved violence against three police officers.

He told the jury:

“Officers who were already within the airport went to the coffee house, but the defendants had already left. They had walked the short distance to the nearby Terminal 2 car park.

Police tracked them there and at 8.28pm three officers entered the payment area. Those three officers were PC Zachary Marsden (an armed officer), PC Ellie Cook (another armed officer) and PC Lydia Ward (who was unarmed).

The officers attempted to move Mohammed Fahir Amaaz (the first defendant) away from a payment machine in order to arrest him, but he resisted, and his brother Muhammed Amaad (the second defendant) intervened.”

The prosecution alleges that both brothers then assaulted PC Marsden. Mr Amaaz is further accused of assaulting PC Cook and breaking PC Ward’s nose during the struggle.

Mr Greaney added:

“The defendants used a high level of violence. Both defendants face a charge of assaulting PC Marsden so as to cause him actual bodily harm.

The first defendant also faces a charge of assaulting PC Ward so as to cause her actual bodily harm and a charge of assaulting an emergency worker in respect of his violence towards PC Cook.”

🔴 CROWN: JURY TO SEE FULL CCTV AND BODYCAM FOOTAGE

Mr Greaney tells the jury that the events at Manchester Airport are clearly captured on CCTV and body-worn video. He describes the case as “not complicated” and says jurors will be able to watch events unfold for themselves rather than rely solely on witness accounts.

Prosecutor Paul Greaney KC told jurors:

“That is a brief introduction to what the case is about. The position of the prosecution is that it is not a complicated case.

The events you are concerned with were captured by CCTV cameras and, in relation to the events in the payment area, on the body worn cameras of police officers as well.”

He added:

“So, you will not have to depend only on the recollections of witnesses. You will also be able to see with your own eyes what happened.”

🔴 CROWN: DEFENDANTS CLAIM SELF-DEFENCE

Jurors are told that the central issue in the trial will be whether the defendants acted in lawful self-defence. The prosecution argues their actions were excessive and unlawful.

Mr Greaney KC told the jury:

“Your role as jurors will be to analyse the footage, watch and listen to the witnesses who were there — including the defendants if they choose to give evidence — and decide whether you are sure that the defendants acted unlawfully or whether, in respect of any particular charge, it may be the case that they were acting in lawful self-defence.”

He added:

“Our prediction is that you will readily conclude that the defendants were not acting in lawful self-defence and that their conduct was unlawful across the offences alleged against them.”

🔴 CCTV SHOWS VIOLENCE INSIDE STARBUCKS

Jurors are shown stills and footage from CCTV cameras inside Terminal 2, which the prosecution says capture the moment the first defendant assaults a passenger.

The jury was shown a still image of the defendants’ mother and their young nephew outside the Starbucks at Terminal 2 arrivals. Both defendants also appear in the frame.

Mr Greaney KC told jurors the footage shows the moment the mother spots Mr Ismaeil, prompting the defendants to enter the café.

The CCTV then shows, the prosecution says, Mr Amaaz “headbutting and then punching towards Mr Ismaeil” at the coffee shop counter, where he was standing with his wife and children.

🔴 11:29am – CROWN: VIOLENCE “OUT OF ANGER…NOT IN SELF-DEFENCE”
Mr Greaney asserts the Starbucks assault was retaliatory, not protective.

He told the jury:

“The two defendants assert… they were acting in self‑defence or in the defence of the other. …Our prediction is that you will readily conclude that the defendants were not acting in lawful self‑defence.”

Continuing his emphasis:
“This violence by the first defendant Mohammed Fahir Amaaz, with his head and fists, was entirely unlawful. He delivered his blows out of anger and/or in punishment, not in self‑defence.”
The CCTV was then replayed for the jury to review the sequence again.

🔴 11:43am – CROWN: CAR PARK ALTERCATION FOLLOWED STARBUCKS ASSAULT

Jurors hear that the confrontation continued after the Starbucks incident, moving to the Terminal 2 car park payment area where police attempted to intervene.
Mr Greaney KC told the jury:

“The defendants had walked the short distance to the nearby Terminal 2 car park… At 8.28pm, three officers entered the payment area. Those officers were PC Zachary Marsden (an armed officer), PC Ellie Cook (another armed officer) and PC Lydia Ward (who was unarmed).”

He said officers attempted to arrest Mr Amaaz near the payment machine, but he resisted and Mr Amaad stepped in:

“Both defendants assaulted PC Marsden. In the moments that followed, the first defendant also assaulted PC Cook and then PC Ward too, breaking her nose. The defendants used a high level of violence.”

The jury were reminded that all three officers were in uniform and acting in the course of their duties.

🔴 11:50am – CROWN: CCTV SHOWS VIOLENCE AS OFFICERS MOVE TO DETAIN

Jurors view CCTV of the pay station incident, where officers confronted the accused. They are told some police actions have been criticised and further footage will follow.

The court was informed that the response by officers has drawn criticism, and jurors would be shown later footage in full to reflect this. Mr Greaney KC said it would be “fair” to view the evidence in context.

CCTV was played twice — once in real time and again in slow motion — showing the moment violence erupted as police attempted to detain the defendants.

🔴 12:30pm – CROWN: OFFICERS SEEN UNDER ATTACK IN NEW CCTV ANGLE
Further CCTV footage is played from a second camera angle, showing the arrest attempt in greater detail. Prosecutor Paul Greaney KC narrates as events escalate.

Jurors were shown additional footage of the incident at the Terminal 2 pay station, this time from another camera, with a slow-motion replay provided.

Mr Greaney KC described the arresting officers as “in full uniform” as they approached Mr Amaaz. Armed officer PC Marsden was seen taking hold of Mr Amaaz’s arm to move him from the payment machine, assisted by two colleagues.

As this happened, Mr Amaad is alleged to have “repeatedly punched” PC Marsden, who Mr Greaney said was “cornered and unable to move.”

Simultaneously, Mr Amaaz is said to have turned on the two female officers. PC Lydia Ward was punched in the face and seen crying, her nose “streaming with blood.” Mr Greaney said the blow broke her nose.

He then turned to PC Ellie Cook. Jurors were told she ducked the first strike, but was hit by a second punch, falling backwards over a baggage trolley.

🔴 12:34pm – CROWN: TASER DEPLOYED AMID FLURRY OF PUNCHES

Prosecutor Paul Greaney KC describes how the violence escalated further as officers attempted to bring the situation under control.

Jurors were told that after attacking the female officers, Mohammed Fahir Amaaz turned back to armed officer PC Marsden, who was aiming his Taser at Mr Amaad.

Mr Greaney KC said the first defendant “attacked him from behind,” knocking PC Marsden into a row of seats before grabbing him around the neck and unleashing “a flurry of punches to his head.”

Mr Amaaz is then alleged to have dragged PC Marsden away from his brother. At this point, PC Ellie Cook fired her Taser at Mr Amaaz in an effort to stop the assault.

🔴 12:40pm – CROWN: OFFICER’S KICK AND STAMP “SHOCKING IN COLD LIGHT OF DAY”

Jurors shown footage of officer’s response during struggle — prosecution says it must be viewed in full context.

Prosecutor Paul Greaney KC addressed jurors regarding CCTV footage showing PC Zachary Marsden kicking defendant Mohammed Fahir Amaaz while he was on the ground.
He said Mr Amaaz “raised his head towards PC Marsden, who in response kicked Mohammed Fahir Amaaz to the face and then brought his foot down towards the top of his head in what looks like a stamping motion.”

Mr Greaney acknowledged the footage “looks rather shocking in the cold light of day,” but argued it must be considered in the context of “the very serious level of threat posed by the defendants to an officer who was concerned that his firearm might be taken from him at an airport.”

He added that in any event, the Crown’s position is that the officer’s actions occurred after the defendants’ alleged violence and are “logically irrelevant to the lawfulness” of their conduct as charged.

🔴 12:45pm – CROWN: JURY TOLD NOT TO BE DISTRACTED BY OFFICER LANGUAGE

*PC Flanagan heard saying, “If you move, I will smash your ***ing face in.”

Mr Greaney KC told jurors they may find this language “disturbing,” but urged them to focus on the key question: whether the defendants acted unlawfully or in self-defence. He said the officer’s remarks came after the alleged assaults and are “logically irrelevant” to guilt.

🔴 12:51pm – OFFICERS’ INJURIES OUTLINED IN DETAIL

Jurors are shown body-worn camera footage of PC Lydia Ward sobbing, her mouth filled with blood, in the immediate aftermath of the incident at Manchester Airport’s Terminal 2.

Prosecutor Paul Greaney KC described in detail the injuries sustained by the three officers involved.

PC Zachary Marsden, the armed officer initially assaulted by both defendants, suffered “post-concussion syndrome,” with symptoms including “severe headache for three days, episodes of dizziness, forgetfulness, difficulties in talking and also bruising and swelling.”

PC Ward suffered a broken nose, which Mr Greaney said “bled profusely at the scene and caused her significant pain and distress.” The injury later required surgical intervention under general anaesthetic to manipulate the fracture. She also sustained “bruising and swelling to her forehead and nose.”

Regarding PC Ellie Cook, the KC said:

“Given the number of punches thrown by the first defendant at PC Cook’s head and face, she was fortunate only to receive relatively minor injuries to her forehead and jaw.”

🔴 12:52pm – CROWN CONCLUDES OPENING REMARKS

Prosecutor Paul Greaney KC concluded the Crown’s opening address with a direct message to the jury.

“Our position is this is not a complicated case. We ask you not to make it complicated.”

🔴 12:55pm – TRIAL BREAKS FOR LUNCH

The jury is dismissed for the lunch adjournment.

When proceedings resume at 2:05pm, the first witness — Detective Sergeant Danielle Bullivant — is expected to take the stand to present a series of agreed facts to the court.

🔴 2:20pm – TRIAL RESUMES

The jury has returned to court and proceedings are set to continue following the lunch adjournment.

🔴 2:25pm – CCTV SHOWS MOVEMENTS BEFORE STARBUCKS INCIDENT

Jurors are shown a 15-minute compilation of CCTV footage capturing the movements of Mrs Akhtar — mother of the accused — and Mr Ismaeil with his family as they made their way through Manchester Airport following their flight.

Prosecuting junior counsel Adam Birkby explains that the footage ends shortly before the alleged confrontation at Starbucks.

🔴 2:31pm – PROSECUTION: JURORS SHOULD NOTE BUILDING TENSION

As CCTV footage of Terminal 2 is played, Prosecutor Paul Greaney KC tells jurors they may observe an atmosphere of tension in the minutes leading up to the Starbucks incident.

He invites the panel to assess the defendants’ movements and demeanour in the footage prior to the alleged assault.

🔴 2:45pm – FIRST WITNESS BEGINS EVIDENCE

Detective Sergeant Danielle Bullivant is the first witness to give evidence in the trial. She takes the jury through a timeline of events constructed by the prosecution, displayed in a ‘sequence of events’ chart intended to help contextualise the CCTV footage seen earlier.

Junior counsel Mr Adam Birkby confirms that the chart reflects the Crown’s interpretation of what the footage shows — but reminds jurors it will be their job to reach their own conclusions. DS Bullivant agrees, acknowledging that while the narrative framework is helpful, the jury must ultimately decide what the images depict.

The first segment under discussion shows Mrs Akhtar — the mother of both defendants — arriving at Manchester Airport. She is met by her sons and a young child, identified as their nephew. CCTV shows the group exiting through the terminal doors and turning right, walking towards the Starbucks location where the initial confrontation later unfolded.

🔴 2:58pm – CCTV SHOWN OF STARBUCKS ASSAULT

Detective Sergeant Bullivant continues giving evidence as the court reviews CCTV footage of the alleged assault inside Terminal 2’s Starbucks.

Under questioning from prosecuting counsel Adam Birkby, the witness agrees that the footage appears to show Mohammed Fahir Amaaz headbutting Abdulkareem Ismaeil, followed by two punches — first with his left hand, then with his right. The final strike may or may not have connected; the footage is inconclusive.

After the confrontation, the defendants are seen leaving the café with their mother and young nephew, continuing toward the Terminal 2 car park pay station. Jurors then view the full sequence on screen.

🔴 3:17pm – STARBUCKS DUTY MANAGER GIVES EYEWITNESS ACCOUNT

Cameron Cartledge, duty manager at Starbucks in Terminal 2 arrivals, is sworn in to give evidence.

Under questioning from Mr Greaney KC, Mr Cartledge confirms he had been working at this branch for two and a half years and was on shift from noon until 8:30pm that day.

He recalls being either behind the bar or in the office during the incident, from where he had a clear view of the café.

He described the arrival of Mr Abdulkareem Ismaeil—whom he recalled as a ‘large man’ and a normal customer. Mr Cartledge said Mr Ismaeil came into the café with his family to order drinks and showed no signs of anything unusual at that time.
The witness then heard raised voices, which he believed were in Arabic, not English, and went to stand at the café door to observe the situation.

He saw the man approximately 10 feet away at the time.

🔴 3:22pm – MANAGER SAW MR ISMAEIL “STAGGER BACK” AFTER HEADBUTT

Starbucks duty manager Cameron Cartledge described the moment he witnessed an alleged assault on Mr Abdulkareem Ismaeil.

He said he saw “a man with his family” being confronted by another man wearing a blue tracksuit, who appeared “aggressive” and was “in his face.” The man in the tracksuit, described as “tall, skinny, Asian or Middle Eastern and Muslim,” was “annoyed at something,” he told the court.

“They were arguing,” Mr Cartledge said. “I don’t know what was being said because I didn’t know the language and the blue tracksuit man headbutted the man in the t-shirt and that’s when I called the police.”

He told jurors Mr Ismaeil “staggered back” towards the counter from the force of the headbutt. He recalled that more blows followed, but they appeared to land on Mr Ismaeil’s shoulder.

The men’s respective families then intervened to separate them and the group walked away, the court heard.

🔴 3:30pm Police arrive and follow ‘blue tracksuit man and family’

Starbucks duty manager Cameron Cartledge told the court that after the confrontation began, members of the public approached the scene. Concerned for the safety of those present, he called the police.

He said officers arrived shortly afterwards and followed the ‘blue tracksuit man’ and his family as they left the area.
🔴 3:43pm – STARBUCKS MANAGER QUESTIONED OVER POLICE CALL

Under cross-examination by Imran Khan KC, representing Mr Amaaz, Starbucks duty manager Cameron Cartledge was asked about the call he made to police during the incident.

Mr Cartledge confirmed he described the situation as “two people fighting” but said he did not see Mr Ismaeil throw any punches.

Judge Flewitt KC intervened to note that the witness had accepted “fighting” was not the accurate description and that the pair were actually arguing.

Mr Cartledge added he saw Mr Ismaeil on his phone and assumed he was contacting police after having “just been assaulted.”

🔴4:08: Witness Explains Why He Described Incident as ‘Fighting’ in Police Call

During cross-examination, Starbucks duty manager Cameron Cartledge was asked why he did not specifically mention the headbutt when he called the police. He explained that he thought the word “fighting” adequately described the situation at the time.

When questioned by defence counsel Imran Khan about whether he realised the men were actually speaking English, Mr Cartledge replied,

“It didn’t sound like English to me.”

Mr Cartledge confirmed he saw the headbutt land “in the face” of Mr Ismaeil but said he did not recall Mr Ismaeil acting in a threatening or menacing way, nor whether he had been making gestures.

Pressed further, he described the “blue tracksuit man” as “threatening”, while saying Mr Ismaeil appeared more passive, “probably more worried about the children behind him.”

4:10 Starbucks Employee Confirms ‘Big Headbutt’ Sent Victim Stumbling Backwards

On re-examination by prosecutor Paul Greaney KC, Starbucks duty manager Cameron Cartledge confirmed details from his police statement. He agreed that he had described witnessing a “big headbutt” delivered by the defendant, which caused Mr Ismaeil to stumble backwards.

🔴4:25 Update: Third Witness, Starbucks Barista, Takes the Stand

Justine Pakalne, a barista working at Starbucks on the day of the incident, was sworn in as the next witness.

Under questioning from the prosecutor, Ms Pakalne said she was stationed at the till taking an order when the events began.

She recalled a family approaching the counter—a couple with two or three children. While she could not clearly remember Mr Ismaeil’s features, she identified him as Asian and noted that he was facing towards her as they placed their order.

🔴4:28 Starbucks Barista Describes Confrontation Before Violence

Ms Pakalne told the court that two men and a woman approached Mr Ismaeil and his family at the counter.

She said the men began arguing in a language she did not understand, while she confirmed speaking Latvian, English, and some Russian herself.

The witness described one man as “angry and aggressive,” while Mr Ismaeil remained “calm and collected.”

According to Ms Pakalne, the woman with Mr Ismaeil said to the men,

“We were not talking about you but about the kids behind you.”

Ms Pakalne said the aggressive man then headbutted Mr Ismaeil into the syrup dispensers, causing both to move back slightly.

She added the other man did not retaliate and appeared shocked, while Mr Ismaeil was “calm but shocked.”

The argument continued briefly, with the man in blue speaking aggressively in English, saying something Ms Pakalne understood as “come outside and fight.” However, no fight took place outside.

🔴4:40 Starbucks barista under cross examination

During cross-examination by Mr Khan, representing Mr Amaaz, Starbucks barista Justine Pakalne confirmed she gave a police statement a week after the pay station violence had ‘gone viral’ online.

Ms Pakalne agreed with the defence’s observation that it is possible to be ‘menacing in a quiet way’ and acknowledged that the man in blue was slimmer than the man he headbutted.

She said she could not clearly see Mr Ismaeil’s face but described his tone of voice as calm.

When questioned about the language spoken, Ms Pakalne said she did not understand the words and did not believe the conversation was in English, despite suggestions both men were speaking English.

She maintained that the man in the blue tracksuit was the aggressor throughout the incident.

🔴 4:55pm – JURY SENT HOME AS FIRST DAY OF TRIAL ENDS

Judge Flewitt KC dismisses the jury for the weekend. The trial will resume at 10:30am on Monday.

Before they leave, the judge reminds jurors:

“It is of the utmost importance that you do not search for or look up anything about this case online.”

🔴 DAY 6 - MONDAY 7th JULY

LIVE UPDATES CONTINUE ABOVE: