Download 'Too Hot', an exclusive Specials track from iTunes

Police have escaped a multi-million pound bill after a Law Lords’ ruling that they are not liable to pay damages for failing to act over threats which led to the murder of a witness.
The Law Lords upheld two appeals brought by the Chief Constables of both Hertfordshire and Sussex police forces to establish the extent of their obligations to protect the life of individuals in the face of known threats.
In the first, Giles van Colle, 25, an optometrist, had reported to Hertfordshire Police several threats made against him by a technician he employed, Daniel Brougham.
Brougham was due to stand trial on theft charges and Mr van Colle was due to give evidence against him.
However, police took no action: they did not rearrest Brougham, charge him with interfering with a witness, or cancel his bail.
In November 2000, Mr van Colle was shot dead three times at close range after leaving his shop in Mill Hill, North London. Brougham was sentenced to life for murder.
The officer in the case, Detective Constable David Ridley, of Hertfordshire Police, was later found guilty in a police disciplinary action of failing to perform his duties diligently over the threats.
Mr van Colle’s parents launched a case against the police under article two of the Human Rights Act, which protects the right to life. They won in both the High Court and Court of Appeal and were awarded £25,000 in compensation.
But today, the Law Lords ruled that police were only liable where they are aware of a real and immediate risk to life and failed to take steps that could have avoided that risk.
Lord Hope of Craighead, who with four other law lords dismissed the appeal, said: “The murder was the action of a seriously disturbed and unpredictable individual.
“In my opinion it cannot reasonably be said that DC Ridley should have anticipated, from the information available at the time, that Brougham constituted a risk to Giles’s life that was both real and imminent.”
Win a luxury weekend to Newcastle and its neighbour Gateshead, find out more here
Risk, resilience and embracing new technology
Industry sectors news at a glance. Interactive heatmap, video and podcast
Discover the power of collective thinking. Submit a solution and be in with a chance to win a Media Hub Home Entertainment System
The inside track on current trends in the charity, not for profit and social enterprise sectors
Everything the Business Traveller needs to know to make a better trip
Make the most of the summer and enter our fabulous photographic competition, you could win a £5000 holiday
Corsica is an island of beauty and contrast, an ideal holiday destination
Enjoy further reading from Travel to Fashion, Business to Sport, discover more
Shortcuts to help you find sections and articles
The clever way to lease a new car is with Car leasing made simple™
2009
per month on 36-month
Personal Contract Hire (PCH)
2008
42850
Car Insurance
£24,250 - £30,346
MI5
London
£60,000
The Environment Agency
Bristol
Up to £90K
Boots
Midlands
OTE £85k
Credit Protection Association
Nationwide Opportunities
Completely London
Luxury Condo's in Manhattan with NYC views
The best new homes in Wimbledon?
Nationwide
Fabulous Cruise And Cruise & Stay Offers Including Virgin Atlantic Flights Prices Start From Only £699pp!
Last Minute Cruise And Cruise & Stay Offers. Med From £499pp, Caribbean From £699pp!
5 star quality at a 3 star price.
8 fabulous Canadian cities ...you won’t find cheaper
Contact our advertising team for advertising and sponsorship in Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times, or place your advertisement.
Times Online Services: Dating | Jobs | Property Search | Used Cars | Holidays | Births, Marriages, Deaths | Subscriptions | E-paper
News International associated websites: Globrix Property Search | Property Finder | Milkround
Copyright 2009 Times Newspapers Ltd.
This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard Terms and Conditions. Please read our Privacy Policy.To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from Times Online, The Times or The Sunday Times, click here.This website is published by a member of the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT number GB 243 8054 69.
The cult of carrying knives ostensibly for self-protection is rightly deplored. Hosever, the mantra "you must not take the law into your own hands" espoused by government and police has, I submit, been undermined by decisions reported on 4th August and 30 July respectively in The Times. In Smith v Chief Constable of Sussex Police it has been held by a majority that there is no duty of care on the part of the police to protect a vulnerable membr of the public who turns to them for help when faced by a very real fear of attack by criminals. Significantly the eminent Lord Bingham of Cornhill (senior law lord) did not share his colleagues' views, which could be held to equate with expediency rather than regard for our common law Perhaps even more serious is that in Van College and Another v Chief Constable of Hertfordshire Constabulary, the police were not deemed to be under any obligation to ensure the safety of a prosecution witness (pace article 2 of the Human Rights ActO. Some of us may have been a little sceptical in the past with regard to the efficacy and duration of police protection and this decision will do nothing to ally the apprehension of potential witnesses.
Brian Whittingham, Clavering, Essex
Some common sense at last. The law lords were correct in their decision that the investigating officer could not AT THAT TIME have known that there was a real/ imminent threat to Giles Van Colle's life. I suggest you read the FACTS of the case before jumping to conclusions. A tragic series of events
Borj, London,
My understanding was that this was just the point in the Van Colle case. The police DID know about the risk and did nothing. That's why the officer was disciplined. My heart goes out to the parents. They deserve better than this.
Jay, London,
Surely the police are shooting themselves in the food (metaphorically speaking). They want people to come forward as witnesses, but they admit they cant actually protect you, nor do they have a legal obligation to protect you. And why would someone want to come forward as a witness again?
Arthur, Newcastle,