Two brothers employed a “high level of violence” during an assault on police officers at Manchester Airport last summer, Liverpool Crown Court heard on Friday as their trial began.
Mohammed Fahir Amaaz, 20, and Muhammad Amaad, 26, are accused of attacking officers in the Terminal 2 building on July 23, 2024, following an earlier altercation at a Starbucks cafe. The incident, which was captured on video and widely shared on social media, sparked significant public debate about police use of force.
Opening the prosecution case, Paul Greaney KC told jurors that Amaaz had headbutted and punched a member of the public, Abdulkareem Ismaeil, at the airport Starbucks before the confrontation with police escalated.
Officers Traced Suspects
The court heard that three officers who were already present at the airport later located the brothers at the terminal’s car park payment area. PC Zachary Marsden and PC Ellie Cook, both armed officers, approached the defendants along with PC Lydia Ward, who was unarmed.
The officers attempted to move Mohammed Fahir Amaaz away from a payment machine in order to arrest him, but he resisted, and his brother Muhammad Amaad intervened,” Mr Greaney told the court. “Both defendants assaulted PC Marsden.”
The prosecutor detailed how the violence escalated rapidly. 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.”
Multiple Assault Charges
Amaaz faces four separate charges relating to the incident. He is accused of assaulting PC Marsden and PC Ward, causing them actual bodily harm, as well as assaulting PC Cook, an emergency worker. He also faces a charge of common assault against Abdulkareem Ismaeil from the earlier Starbucks incident.
His older brother, Muhammad Amaad, is charged with assaulting PC Marsden, causing actual bodily harm. Both men, from Tarnside Close in Rochdale, Greater Manchester, have pleaded not guilty to all charges.
The brothers appeared in court wearing matching black suits with white shirts and black ties as their trial got underway.
CCTV Evidence Central
Mr Greaney emphasized to jurors that the prosecution’s case would rely heavily on video evidence. 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 said.
“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.”
The prosecutor characterized this as “not a complicated case” and predicted jurors would “readily conclude that the defendants were not acting in lawful self-defence and that their conduct was unlawful.”
Self-Defence Claims
The court heard that both defendants maintain they were acting in lawful self-defence or in defence of each other during the incident. This defence forms a central part of their case against the assault charges.
“The two defendants assert, as we understand it, that at all stages they were acting in lawful self-defence or in defence of the other,” Mr Greaney told the court, before adding the prosecution’s view that this claim would not stand up to scrutiny.
High-Profile Case
The case has attracted intense public interest since video footage of the incident emerged on social media last July. Initial footage appeared to show a police officer kicking and stamping on a man lying face-down on the floor, prompting widespread concern.
However, subsequent video clips showed two female officers had been knocked to the ground in the build-up to the incident, providing additional context to the confrontation.
Prime Minister Keir Starmer acknowledged at the time that he had seen the video and understood public concern about it.
No Officers Charged
The Crown Prosecution Service announced in December that no police officers would face charges in connection with the incident. Frank Ferguson, Head of the CPS Special Crime and Counter Terrorism Division, stated that after reviewing all available evidence, including expert reports on police use of force, there was “no realistic prospect of conviction” against any officers.
The CPS decision not to charge officers was based on a careful consideration of evidence and expert opinion, taking into account police training in the context of the incident.
Media Warnings
As jury selection began earlier this week, Judge Neil Flewitt KC warned potential jurors about the extensive media coverage the case had received. He told the panel of 40 potential jurors, later reduced to 28, that they “must not allow yourselves to be influenced by anything you may have read or heard on the mainstream media or social media.
The judge emphasized that verdicts must be reached “based on the evidence presented in court” and urged jurors not to look up any information about the case on the internet during the trial proceedings.
Political Controversy
The incident gained additional notoriety when Reform UK leader Nigel Farage suggested his party would consider bringing a private prosecution, claiming it exemplified a “two-tier” policing system. He argued that those involved in anti-immigration protests had faced immediate prosecution while this case had experienced delays.
The brothers’ lawyer, Aamer Anwar, has stated his clients will “vigorously contest” the allegations. He has also indicated they will request a victim’s right of review regarding the CPS decision not to charge any officers.
IOPC Investigation
The Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) has confirmed their investigation into the incident continues and is nearing completion. Greater Manchester Police has stated it has cooperated fully with the IOPC investigation while offering support to its officers.
The trial, which is expected to last three weeks, continues at Liverpool Crown Court. Both defendants remain on bail with conditions.
Follow for more updates on Britannia Daily
