Ronkswood police shooting - shot dad seeks compensation

Aaron Humphries was accidentally shot in the leg by an officer when surrounded by armed police in Ronkswood Hill, Worcester after reports he had a gun.

Now he is taking the case to the High Court as part of a civil action against West Mercia Police for compensation, saying he has yet to receive an apology and has lost his £45K a year career as a civil engineer.

Meanwhile, the officer who shot him remains on duty although police say they have had their authorisation to carry firearms withdrawn.

MORE STORIES

Lucky escape after dramatic caravan fire near M5 junction

Car crime spike - man, 37, arrested in Malvern 

The bullet from her rifle punched a hole through the door of his white BMW and then through his leg, shattering his shinbone.

Today he still bears the scars, an entry and exit wound, still limps and his leg swells up and becomes painful if he walks for any distance, leaving him very fatigued.

The 32-year-old has complained of life-changing injuries, physical pain, PTSD and fits/seizures after he was shot through the right leg on Saturday, October 2 last year.

At the time West Mercia Police had received reports Humphries had a firearm. He did have an imitation submachine gun in his car but says it was just a BB gun and he had not used it to threaten anyone, calling it a 'plastic toy'.

INJURED: Aaron Humphries. Photo: James Connell

The Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) said there was 'a case to answer' for misconduct.

But West Mercia Police, conducting its own internal probe, decided the officer's actions did not amount to misconduct because the firearm was discharged accidentally.  

SCAR: Aaron Humphries still carries scars from the day he was accidentally shot by West Mercia Police in Ronkswood Hill, Worcester

Solicitor Iain Gould, who specialises in compensation claims against the police, is pursuing High Court action against West Mercia Police. 

He said: "Aaron certainly considers it to be a whitewash. My client is highly disappointed but not surprised by the outcome of the misconduct proceedings against the police officer who shot him.

"This is a case of West Mercia Police exonerating themselves behind closed doors. The officer in question negligently discharged a lethal weapon that crippled Aaron, which is terrible enough, but which could instead have killed him or indeed one of the officer’s colleagues or an innocent bystander.

"I don’t believe the public should feel comfortable that this officer has escaped censure and may be allowed to continue carrying a firearm.

"Aaron has no intention of letting matters rest here, and with my assistance is actively pursuing High Court proceedings against West Mercia Police in which the truth of this matter will see the full light of day.”

We have previously reported how Mr Humphries was sentenced to 20 months in prison suspended for two years at Worcester Crown Court in January.

He admitted possession of an imitation firearm (an MP5K submachine gun) at a time he was committing another offence (criminal damage at his ex-partner's home in Dines Green).

He further admitted criminal damage - destroying property without lawful excuse - on the same date, including windows, a door and a Ring Doorbell belonging to Platform Housing.

Living alone in Birmingham, he has lost his job as a civil engineer building roads, deep sewers, bridges, car parks and housing estates and is now forced to claim benefits.

He was earning £45,000 a year. Now he's getting £260 per month on Universal Credit.

Deputy Chief Constable Julian Moss said: “As Aaron Humphries has admitted, he was carrying an imitation firearm at the time of this incident. Of course, officers responding did not know that it was an imitation and not the real thing – therefore their weapons were drawn whilst they worked to resolve the situation.

“During the incident an officer’s weapon was discharged and we immediately made a referral to the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC). They referred the matter back to the force to establish if the officer’s actions amounted to misconduct.

“As such a misconduct meeting was held.  The meeting fully reviewed all of the evidence and it was determined that there was no misconduct as the firearm was accidentally discharged, which of course we apologise for. We stand by the finding and are satisfied that due process has been followed. We have also identified organisational learning from the incident and work is underway to address this. We can confirm the officer has had their authorisation to carry firearms withdrawn.”