Couple wrongly arrested over Gatwick Airport drone debacle score £200k payout from cops

Add that to the £790k wasted on Xmas 2018 shutdown investigation


A couple arrested by bungling local police who wrongly blamed them for the Gatwick drone fiasco have been handed £200,000 in compensation.

Paul Gait and Elaine Kirk were arrested and held in cells for 36 hours after their Crawley home was stormed by a dozen police gunmen in December 2018. The payout, negotiated by lawyers after the innocent couple sued police, shines fresh light on the behaviour of Sussex Police's chief constable, Giles York.

"We are delighted to have finally received vindication, it has been a very long fight for justice," said the couple in a statement reported by The Guardian newspaper. "The sums being paid by Sussex Police and letter received from the assistant chief constable are confirmation of our innocence and wrongful treatment."

The two sued in the civil courts for wrongful arrest and false imprisonment.

Panicky police were under pressure to find whoever was flying a drone near Gatwick Airport 18 months ago, causing it to shut down for three days right as the Christmas travel season was beginning.

Gait had been at work when the first few drone sightings were reported to police. Despite colleagues immediately vouching for him, desperate cops continued to hold him and Kirk in custody regardless, while searching for evidence.

It later emerged (by York's own admission) that Sussex Police were chasing their own drones over Gatwick, having sent them up to try and spot the errant craft causing the shutdown. Nonetheless, the chief constable made an insincere radio apology to the couple shortly after the incident – insincere because in the next breath of his BBC interview he said: "[But] what might have been worse as an experience for [Gait and Kirk] would have been to be released under investigation still."

York was suggesting that things would have been somehow worse for Gait and Kirk had his constables released the innocent couple from custody as soon as they realised they'd got it wrong, rather than keeping them for the maximum time allowed by law. The couple are said to have received "no explanation" from police as to why they were kept locked in cells for so long.

The chief constable yesterday deployed the force's assistant chief constable to take all the flak on his behalf. David Miller said in a letter to the Gaits: "We recognise that things could have been done differently and, as a result, Sussex Police have agreed to pay you compensation and legal costs."

The Gaits received £55,000 in compensation with the remaining £145,000 going to their legal costs.

Sussex Police wasted £790,000 on its failed investigation, having interviewed 96 "people of interest" in the process. Nobody else was arrested and nobody has ever been charged. It seems unlikely, two years later, that the full truth will ever be known. ®

Similar topics

Narrower topics


Other stories you might like

  • DigitalOcean tries to take sting out of price hike with $4 VM
    Cloud biz says it is reacting to customer mix largely shifting from lone devs to SMEs

    DigitalOcean attempted to lessen the sting of higher prices this week by announcing a cut-rate instance aimed at developers and hobbyists.

    The $4-a-month droplet — what the infrastructure-as-a-service outfit calls its virtual machines — pairs a single virtual CPU with 512 MB of memory, 10 GB of SSD storage, and 500 GB a month in network bandwidth.

    The launch comes as DigitalOcean plans a sweeping price hike across much of its product portfolio, effective July 1. On the low-end, most instances will see pricing increase between $1 and $16 a month, but on the high-end, some products will see increases of as much as $120 in the case of DigitalOceans’ top-tier storage-optimized virtual machines.

    Continue reading
  • GPL legal battle: Vizio told by judge it will have to answer breach-of-contract claims
    Fine-print crucially deemed contractual agreement as well as copyright license in smartTV source-code case

    The Software Freedom Conservancy (SFC) has won a significant legal victory in its ongoing effort to force Vizio to publish the source code of its SmartCast TV software, which is said to contain GPLv2 and LGPLv2.1 copyleft-licensed components.

    SFC sued Vizio, claiming it was in breach of contract by failing to obey the terms of the GPLv2 and LGPLv2.1 licenses that require source code to be made public when certain conditions are met, and sought declaratory relief on behalf of Vizio TV owners. SFC wanted its breach-of-contract arguments to be heard by the Orange County Superior Court in California, though Vizio kicked the matter up to the district court level in central California where it hoped to avoid the contract issue and defend its corner using just federal copyright law.

    On Friday, Federal District Judge Josephine Staton sided with SFC and granted its motion to send its lawsuit back to superior court. To do so, Judge Staton had to decide whether or not the federal Copyright Act preempted the SFC's breach-of-contract allegations; in the end, she decided it didn't.

    Continue reading
  • US brings first-of-its-kind criminal charges of Bitcoin-based sanctions-busting
    Citizen allegedly moved $10m-plus in BTC into banned nation

    US prosecutors have accused an American citizen of illegally funneling more than $10 million in Bitcoin into an economically sanctioned country.

    It's said the resulting criminal charges of sanctions busting through the use of cryptocurrency are the first of their kind to be brought in the US.

    Under the United States' International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEA), it is illegal for a citizen or institution within the US to transfer funds, directly or indirectly, to a sanctioned country, such as Iran, Cuba, North Korea, or Russia. If there is evidence the IEEA was willfully violated, a criminal case should follow. If an individual or financial exchange was unwittingly involved in evading sanctions, they may be subject to civil action. 

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022