Dalian Atkinson: Police officer ‘kicked’ ex-footballer as ‘final resort’

Counsel for a Computer accused of murdering Dalian Atkinson has claimed the ex-footballer was not immobile on the bottom when he was kicked twice within the head “as a final resort” after the officer ran out of choices.

Defence QC Patrick Gibbs additionally submitted that the size of a 33-second Taser deployment by Computer Benjamin Monk was the clearest proof that it was delivered by mistake “in full confusion and panic”.

Prosecutors declare Monk used illegal and unreasonable drive out of anger, previous to the demise of former Aston Villa, Sheffield Wednesday and Ipswich City striker Atkinson in August 2016.

Monk, 43, has pleaded not responsible to different costs of homicide and manslaughter, whereas his then girlfriend, 31-year-old Computer Mary Ellen Bettley-Smith, denies assaulting Atkinson with a baton close to his father’s dwelling in Telford, Shropshire.

Addressing the 11-member jury panel at Birmingham Crown Court docket on Thursday, Mr Gibbs mentioned the proof steered Monk was frightened somewhat than offended throughout a six-minute confrontation with the previous Premier League star.

Mr Gibbs advised the courtroom: “There was one thing about the best way wherein he (Atkinson) introduced on the street which made (a witness inside a home) take ballistic cowl and to inform his spouse to do the identical factor.”

Claiming Monk and Bettley-Smith had “by no means actually recovered” from their first impression of Atkinson, Mr Gibbs added: “Occasions go from 0-60 in a couple of minute flat as a result of that is all it took for his psychotic state to present itself and for the Taser to be fired and for Miss Bettley-Smith to press her emergency button.”

After a primary Taser firing had no impact on Atkinson, Mr Gibbs mentioned, the ex-footballer had smashed a glass door panel at his father’s home, leaving Monk with “each cause to concern the worst”.

Mr Gibbs advised the jury: “He (Monk) wasn’t mistaken to be fearful in regards to the occupant.

“From what we now know, this incident may have ended very otherwise if Mr Atkinson had received again into the home.”

Throughout his submissions, Mr Gibbs mentioned of Monk: “He knew he was dealing with an aggressive, irrational, apparently highly effective one that appeared to not be attentive to cause.

“He knew there was no (Taser) cartridge 4. What he didn’t know was that two (police) automobiles and 4 officers have been solely a couple of minute away.

“Was Mr Monk offended or was he scared at that time? He had actually been frightened sufficient moments earlier than to run away.”

Mr Gibbs asserted that it was very simple to dissect the six minutes within the sanitised atmosphere of a courtroom, however “fairly totally different to have these six minutes occur to you in actual time not realizing what’s going to occur subsequent.”

Witness after witness had spoken of preliminary makes an attempt to pacify Atkinson, Mr Gibbs mentioned, including that Monk had used “his final resort final” and solely when he had run out of different choices.

Mr Gibbs requested: “What’s the proof that he was offended somewhat than frightened?

“There aren’t any phrases of anger directed at Mr Atkinson. Upon correct evaluation you could discover it tough to flee the conclusion that the prosecution say he was offended as a result of they need to.

“As a result of solely by alleging anger can they keep away from the in any other case frequent sense conclusion that he acted as he did within the warmth of the second – perhaps brilliantly, perhaps not so brilliantly – to guard himself, to guard his probationary (police officer) girlfriend and the occupant (of the home).”

Claiming the forensic proof confirmed Atkinson was not mendacity immobile earlier than being kicked, Mr Gibbs invited the jurors to think about if the third half-minute discharge of a Taser was the results of a “convulsive grip” of the weapon.

Mr Gibbs added that the jury had now heard the context of the kicks, which left two bootlace imprints on Atkinson’s brow.

The barrister advised the jury: “Whereas it’s nonetheless horrible to think about these kicks, you may have a greater understanding of how in panic, if that’s what it was, they could have been delivered as a final resort within the warmth of the second.”

The trial continues.

Supply hyperlink

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *