Deaths in custody have become a regrettable fact of life for too many Afrikan families in the UK. The cases are often shrouded in intransigence, obstruction and misdirection from the state. The state play book is invariably to draw out any investigative process, for years or even decades if necessary, in order to dilute the righteous anger of the abused. Even among this recurring litany of injustice, few cases are as macabre as that of Christopher Alder.
Bro. Christopher’s sister Janet provides an overview of how the case began:
“Christopher Alder was a former paratrooper decorated for his services in the Falklands; he had two children, and was in training for a new career in computer programming. On April 1, 1998, after a night out, Christopher got into a fight outside the Waterfront nightclub in Hull; after being punched in the face, he was briefly knocked unconscious and lost a tooth. An ambulance was called, and Christopher was taken to Hull Royal Infirmary, accompanied by police officers. His injuries were not deemed serious, and he was discharged, after which the police drove him to the police station one mile away.
Half an hour later he was dead. ” (1)
Sis. Janet goes on to fill in some of the blanks:
“By the time Christopher arrived in the police station, he was unconscious again, had lost his belt as well as another tooth, and had received new cuts to the lip and above the eye. But neither the cause of these injuries, nor their role in causing his death, have ever been investigated.
Christopher had been left face down in the custody suite gasping for breath in the last minutes of his life, with police officers later standing around making monkey noises over his corpse – but the jury looking at the case were denied access to the CCTV audiotape which clearly revealed this.
The official ‘investigation’ into Christopher’s death allowed all the evidence from the police van – including blood samples, CS gas canisters and clothing – to be destroyed.” (2)
The police made no attempt to put him in the recovery position while he lay handcuffed on the floor – with his trousers and pants pulled down. The CCTV footage can be seen here: https://vimeo.com/36009007. (3)
In case of any doubt, the tone of the ‘investigation’ was established within days of the death. Six police police officers raided his flat and sealed it off to two weeks while they took inventory of its contents. An official report by the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) later noted that it was “more in keeping with what might be expected if Mr Alder were a suspect rather than a victim.” One plausible view is that this had less to do with investigating the death than with finding something to smear his name in anticipation of a campaign for justice, a state strategy also seen in the cases of Joy Gardner, Mark Duggan, Rashan Charles and Edson Da Costa among others. (4)
In spite of the police’s best efforts to frustrate the case by destroying crucial evidence, in 2000 the inquest jury returned a unanimous verdict of “unlawful killing,” extremely rare then (twelve such verdicts in 509 cases between 1991 and 2104) and virtually impossible now. (5) But cases like Christopher Alder and Sean Rigg show (with Kingsley Burrell being the notable exception), even when the bar is lowered to misconduct or simply telling lies, the police escape sanction. (6)
But thanks to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) and its prescient mantra of “insufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction”, prosecutions are even less likely than “unlawful killing” verdicts. In fact, statistically speaking, a police officer is more likely to be prosecuted (and convicted) for cruelty to an animal in their care than to be charged (let alone convicted) in connection with the death of a person in their care. (7)
Following the inquest verdict the five officers involved, Sergeant John Dunn, PC Matthew Barr, PC Neil Blakey, PC Nigel Dawson and Acting Sergeant Mark Ellerington, were charged with gross negligence, manslaughter and misconduct in high office in 2002. But it seemed clear that the CPS was determined to ensure there were no convictions by conflicting the evidence to such an extent that the judge concluded that he no choice but to throw the case out. Reflecting on the experience, Sis. Janet said:
“The CPS did the job of the defense – they eradicated any evidence of police wrongdoing. I’d wanted [the CPS] to investigate why he’d received additional injuries and lost an additional tooth on transit to the police station; why his belt was missing and his trousers were down; why their van had been cleaned, their clothes dry-cleaned, and CS gas canisters destroyed. But on all those things, the CPS totally ignored me…They had never ever even considered whether an assault by the police officers could have caused Christopher’s additional injuries. I was very very shocked at that.
The evidence that incriminated these police officers was not even put into the case (e.g. the audio of the monkey noises). When it came to the medical evidence for gross negligence and manslaughter, they conflicted the evidence. The evidence to suggest that Christopher would have died [even if his injuries had been treated] was put together with the evidence collected by the family to say that he would have survived.
I always felt, from the beginning, that this case was set to fail. It basically proved me right. And because this case didn’t get past the halfway stage – which I believe the CPS were well aware it would not – the police officers once again were able to evade answering any questions whatsoever.” (8)
Not surprisingly an internal disciplinary hearing in 2003 cleared all five of any wrongdoing and they were allowed to take early retirement. But Sis. Janet continued her pursuit of justice by mounting not one but two legal cases, one at the European Court of Human Rights, and a civil case against the CPS for their mishandling of the prosecution. Then in 2004, the Home Office ordered the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) to conduct a review of the whole investigation into Christopher’s death.
The IPCC report was published in 2006 and concluded:
“There is no doubt in my mind that the events leading to and following Mr Alder’s death represent very serious failings by many of the individuals and organisations involved – but the process that followed did not hold any individual responsible for these failings. No individuals have been held responsible… I do not want there to be any doubt about my findings. The most serious failings were by four of the police officers involved: Police Constable (PC) Barr, PC Blakey, PC Dawson and Police Sergeant (PS) Dunn. I believe they were guilty of the most serious neglect of duty.” (9)
The report went on to highlight “three major systemic failures that go beyond the responsibilities of the individuals involved, ” namely the racial stereotyping of Christopher Alder by the police, the lack relevant information passed between medical staff and police and the police disciplinary system given that “acquittal of the officers in the trial and disciplinary hearings did not amount to an endorsement of their actions” and .“their behaviour was not acceptable, and fell seriously short of the standards that are expected of police officers.” However, the report did not recommend any further action against the police except that they make an “unreserved apology” to the Alder family. (10)
The case at the European Court was due in November 2011. Journalist Dan Glazebrook cogently summarises the events:
“The British government had fought tooth and nail against the case being heard. But then, on the eve of the case commencing, the government issued an extraordinary statement admitting that the police had breached articles 2,3 and 14 of the European Convention of Human Rights in their treatment of Christopher – that is, they had breached his right to life, to freedom from torture, inhuman or degrading treatment and to freedom from discrimination. The British government was effectively admitting its own police were guilty of a racist killing, and that this had never been properly investigated. One might have thought such an admission would be the trigger for a proper investigation to actually be finally carried out. It was not. Once again, despite what was now a fourth official admission of wrongdoing, killing and cover-up, no action was taken.” (11)
But it seemed like ‘getting way with murder’ was not enough for the British state. They had a cruel and macabre twist in store for the family. Christopher Alder was laid to rest in 2000, or so they thought. Inexplicably, the body in the casket was actually that of Elder Grace Kamara who died in Hull in 1999. When this finally came to light in 2011 it was passed off as a terrible “mix-up.” But Freedom of Information request lodged by Sis. Janet revealed that her brother’s body had all the correct documentation and was signed off under his name when it was moved to another mortuary in 2005 – five years after his ‘funeral.’ Further investigation revealed that his frozen body was shown to fifty-nine officers for some form of “training” while it was in the mortuary. (12)
Probably the only reason it came to light was due to the persistence of Grace Kamara’s family. They had petitioned for twelve years for visas for members to come over from Nigeria for the funeral but were faced with interminable delays by he Home Office who were ostensibly in on the cover-up. With the visas finally approved in 2011, coupled with their insistence for an open casket funeral the state had to finally come clean. (13)
However, the full extent of the state’s war on Janet Alder had still not being fully revealed. Similar to but in many ways beyond the Stephen Lawrence case, in 2013 it was revealed that, around the time of the inquest into her brother’s death, up fourteen police officers were used to spy on her, her supporters (including ‘four large black men’ that attended the inquest that looked “intimidating”) and even tried to listen to private and legally protected conversations with her barrister. (14)
Although the misconduct hearing that took place in early 2018 found that the surveillance was unlawful, could not be justified and was “probably influenced by racism,” (15) it concluded that the officers involved had “no case to answer” as the source of the verbal orders they received could not be identified and were not recorded. (16)
In response to the verdict Sis. Janet said:
“I am not surprised nothing came out of this. Humberside had no real commitment to bringing the case. I still don’t know why I was followed. And those who authorised the surveillance have evaded responsibility.” (17)
Deborah Coles, Director of INQUEST, that supports families of those that have died in custody said:
“This hearing amounts to a shocking lack of accountability, as senior officers who authorised this inappropriate and unlawful surveillance evade identification and no one is held responsible. This reprehensible spying was a clear attempt to intimidate and undermine Janet’s attempts to get to the truth about the brutal reality of the unlawful killing of her brother by police.
Decades on Janet is still being treated with contempt, as she was ignored and forgotten in this process. The weak and inconclusive results of this hearing are of great concern, as the wider issue of undercover policing begins to be explored. An unlawful killing and unlawful surveillance with no accountability shows that the rule of law does not apply to police officers at an individual and senior management level.” (18)
Sis. Janet is now fund-raising to publish a book on her fight for justice and has so received £2,318 towards her target of £10,000 (https://fundrazr.com/christopheralder?ref=ab_AXqp3YN45fBAXqp3YN45fB). The book is scheduled for a late 2019 release and everyone who donates at least £20 will receive a copy of the book. It behoves us all to ensure that this testament to enduring British injustice and cruelty – and the resistance to it – sees the light of day.
(1) Janet Alder (02/10/18) Please fund my book Christopher Alder – the truth. https://fundrazr.com/christopheralder?ref=ab_AXqp3YN45fBAXqp3YN45fB
(2) Ibid.
(3) Dan Bell (02/08/15) Case study: Christopher Alder. https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/stories/2012-02-07/case-study-christopher-alder
(4) Dan Glazebrook (15/11/11) How Humberside police, CPS & UK govt conspired to cover up racist killing of Christopher Alder. https://www.rt.com/op-ed/311384-christopher-alder-police-brutality
(5) Ibid.
(6) INQUEST (19/12/18) Gross misconduct charges proven against one West Midlands Police officer following 2011 restraint death of Kingsley Burrell. https://www.inquest.org.uk/gross-misconduct-proven-burrell
(7) Harmit Athwal & Jenny Bourne (2015) Dying For Justice. Institute of Race Relations. p. 43. http://s3-eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/wpmedia.outlandish.com/irr/2017/04/26155052/Dying_for_Justice_web.pdf. Cases cited include: ‘Dog ban for ex Metropolitan Police handler after deaths’, BBC News (12 October 2011). <http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-15280409>; Sam Jones, ‘Nottinghamshire police dog handler guilty of animal cruelty’, Guardian, (22 February 2010) <http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/feb/22/police-dog-handler-animal-cruelty>; Kelly Fenna, ‘Two North Wales police officers who were cruel to dogs should be sacked, say
animal lovers’, Daily Post (26 November 2008). <http://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/two-north-wales-police-officers-2806533>; John Davison, ‘Police trainers convicted of cruelty to dogs’, Independent (6 November 1998). <http://www.independent.co.uk/news/police-trainers-convicted-of-cruelty-to-dogs-1183024.html>.
(8) Glazebrook. Op. Cit.
(9) Independent Police Complaints Commission (27/02/06) Report, dated 27th February 2006, of the Review into the events leading up to and following the death of Christopher Alder on 1st April 1998. p. 10 https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/250834/0971_i.pdf
(10) IPCC. p. 12-13
(11) Glazebrook. Op. Cit.
(12) Ibid.
(13) Ibid.
(14) Rob Evans (27/02/18) ‘Four large black men’ at inquest followed by police, hearing told. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/feb/27/christopher-alder-inquest-humberside-police-four-large-black-men-sister-followed-hearing-told
(15) Rob Evans (07/03/18) ‘Police targeting of dead man’s sister ‘probably influenced by racism’. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/mar/07/police-spy-operation-janet-alder-probably-influenced-by-racism-ipcc
(16) INQUEST (01/03/18) Humberside police misconduct hearing finds that surveillance of Janet Alder was unlawful but concludes with ‘no case to answer’ for officers involved. https://www.inquest.org.uk/alder-surveillance-conclusion
(17) Ibid.
(18) Ibid.
We ask the question:
Christopher Alder 21 years on – Proof that the police are above the law?
1) If the outcome seems so pre-determined, why protest against deaths in custody?
2) Why is a police officer more likely to be punished for harming an animal than killing an Afrikan?
3) What would have to happen for the police for receive any kind of sanction, even for conduct?
4) Is police surveillance of death in custody campaigns standard practice?
5) Have you contributed to the book fund?
Our Special Guest:
Sis. Janet Alder: is the sister of Christopher Alder who for over twenty years has lead the campaign to deliver truth and justice about the circumstances around his death and is planning to write a book on her experiences.