The decision to prosecute an armed police officer who crashed while racing to the scene of a terror attack in London has been described as “appalling” by the Metropolitan Police Commissioner.
Sir Mark Rowley said no other country in the world would take one of its most highly trained civil servants to court for bravely trying to protect life and called for an urgent review of the accountability system.
His comments came after a jury at Southwark Crown Court cleared Pc Paul Fisher of dangerous driving following a six-day trial.
The 46-year-old firearms officer lost control of his unmarked BMW X5 and crashed into two other vehicles and a wall while responding to a stabbing spree by terrorist Sudesh Amman in Streatham, south London, in February 2020.
It took almost four years for the case to come to court, but Mr Fisher was acquitted by a jury after five hours of deliberations.
Amman, who was under the supervision of anti-terrorism police, stabbed two people with a knife he bought from a hardware store. Just over a minute later he was shot dead by armed undercover officers.
Mr Fisher was on a surveillance operation with two other armed police officers at the time of the crash, which left two members of the public slightly injured.
He vehemently denied dangerous driving while admitting he let people down with his “momentary mistake”. His lawyer, Kevin Baumber, said: “The last thing intended was to cause any harm. Not every collision is a crime.”
In a statement following the verdict, Sir Mark said: “If a police officer makes honest mistakes under the most intense pressure while rushing to a live terrorist incident, it cannot be right that this should be dealt with in a criminal case nearly four years later. Hence the treatment of this brave officer by the accountability systems.
“No other country in the world would put one of its best-trained officers in court to respond to one of the most serious incidents we can deal with and do all they could to save lives.
“Pc Fisher’s driving errors were made under the most intense pressure as he tried to protect the public from a terrorist. The correct answer would be a quick review of this incident, warnings, retraining, and testing. Instead, there were almost four years of stress.
“I routinely hear from police officers who avoid pursuits or even avoid training because they know their split-second, pressured decisions will be unraveled many years later. This case further undermines the trust of all officials who use their authority to ensure the safety of the public.
“The system needs to change. “The alternative is that our colleagues begin to fear an unbalanced and disproportionate system rather than confronting terrorists and criminals intent on attacking communities.”
Sir Mark said officers “fully expect to be held accountable for their actions, but they need to know that the system that holds them to account will be swift, fair, competent and that split-second decisions made every day will be recognised”. “The current order clearly fails these tests.”
He said he was “very grateful that the Home Office and the Attorney General have carried out a comprehensive review to find a more appropriate balance of accountability.” “We will continue to provide all kinds of support to the authorities in this process,” he said.
Following the decision, Metropolitan Police Federation President Ken Marsh said: “Frankly, this case should never have gone to court.
“It is a very perverse situation that a police officer who did the job that the public expected, that is, bravely faced the danger of a terrorist attack, finds himself in the dock while his career is at risk.
“Let us remember that our colleagues risked their lives to protect the public that day. That’s what we do. The public would rightly be appalled that brave police officers responding to a terrorist attack were treated this way.
“We must do better, or we risk a society where police officers will be left questioning whether they should be heading toward this danger. This potential hesitation caused by the hindsight team will cost lives.
“This can’t be true. “We now want PC Paul Fisher to be allowed to continue his career and do the job the public expects of him.”
A CPS spokesman said: “The CPS does not decide whether a person is guilty of a criminal offence; We make fair, independent and objective assessments of whether it is appropriate to bring allegations to court.
“In this case, we decided that it was appropriate for the court to consider a single charge of dangerous driving. The jury found the defendant not guilty and we respect their verdict.”