West Midlands Police initially accused staff at the Glamorous club in Hurst Street of attacking a man who had been ejected from the premises – but at a Birmingham City Council licensing hearing admitted that was not the case
Police have been strongly criticised at a licensing hearing after wrongly accusing a Birmingham nightclub’s door staff of attacking a man who had just been ejected from the venue.
West Midlands Police had called for an expedited or speedy review of the licence for the Glamorous bar in Hurst Street in Birmingham’s Gay Village, after an incident outside the venue on Sunday, March 30.
The force said two people had been ‘lawfully ejected’ from the venue, when an incident then took place outside at around 5.10am.
A man was knocked unconscious outside the venue – and the police claimed it was down to a Glamorous doorman, which was later confirmed was not the case.
In a statement from Detective Superintendent Dave Sproson, accompanying the licensing review application, said: “Outside the premises the persons ejected from the premises have been involved in a discussion with the door staff.
“This has culminated in door staff attacking the persons ejected and assaulting one of them rendering them unconscious.
“This matter is wounding contrary to section 20 of Offences Against The Persons Act 1861 which is a serious crime by virtue of the maximum sentence on conviction being up to five years imprisonment.
“West Midlands Police have serious concerns for the promotion of the licensing objectives at this premises.
“The premises have been carrying out licensable activity when the incident occurred and door staff from the premises have been culpable in regards to the incident.”
But at the licensing sub-committee B expedited review hearing, held last Friday (April 4), councillors heard the police backtrack and confirm it was not a doorman at the venue involved.
While the substance of the meeting was held in private session, due to an ongoing police investigation into the incident, licence holder Matthew Eason confirmed he had attended to fight the initial claim which was then dropped.
He told BirminghamLive: “West Midlands Police did their 20-minute presentation where they backed down from what they initially said.
“I was originally there because they had accused one of our doorman of being involved. We had footage to show that wasn’t the case.
“Police had also asked for our opening hours to be reduced but that was rejected.
“They had asked for first aid training and I said actually that’s quite a good idea. I think everyone should have that anyway.”
He continued: “I said we are a safe space for the LGBTQ community. This November we will have been open 10 years and in that time we have been a safe space.
“The licensing officers have all got my phone number and didn’t ring me to ask if it was one of our doormen that knocked this man out.
“The police did attend on the night and did come in and review the footage and they were happy it wasn’t one of our door staff. They said they were happy with how we dealt with it.
“The guy that punched the man and knocked him out is a doorman but not one of ours.
“I just wish they had investigated it a bit more and phoned me up. I don’t know where they got the information from that it was one of our doormen. We could have proved it wasn’t straight away.”
Birmingham City Council’s licensing sub-committee, chaired by Councillor Saddak Miah, roundly criticised the police’s licensing application.
The committee said the claims by the police were ‘quite a departure’ from what actually happened.
In its interim steps decision it said: “The sub-committee was surprised that although the application had stated that it had been the premises’ own door staff who had attacked persons who had been ejected, and had assaulted one of them rendering him unconscious.
“The officers who attended the meeting to address the sub-committee confirmed that this had not been the case.
“It had in fact been somebody else who had attacked and assaulted a person, and this was shown on the CCTV recordings.
“The sub-committee noted that this was quite a departure from what had been stated on the superintendent’s certificate.”
The police had claimed the ‘serious crime incident’ was caused by ‘a lack of management control’.
Police then had claimed the people were ejected from the club, then allowed to engage with people outside, and no one from the club had tried to ‘stop the incident escalating’ or ‘exercise any control’.
But the committee found there was ‘confusion’ over who the people were in the CCTV who became involved in the incident and whether they were staff from other licensed premises – which the police were ‘unable to confirm’.
The committee said this ‘did not inspire confidence’. The police had called for shortened opening hours, a shortening of hours for licensable activities, a new dispersal policy and first aid training.
And Mr Eason, the licence holder, objected to all but the first aid training request and said there had not been an incident inside the venue before the ejection as police claimed.
He also said there was a risk if his door staff went beyond the premises’ boundary to get involved – which the sub-committee agreed with.
The sub-committee said: “Having heard all of the evidence, the Members found that the starting point was that the grounds for the application had been somewhat misleading, in that it had not in fact been a member of the Glamorous Show Bar’s door staff who had committed the assault at all.
“The CCTV, played to the Sub-Committee, had shown the assault, and the recording had confirmed that the premises’ own door staff had not attacked the patron.
“It had been some other person, unrelated to the premises. The members considered that this altered things significantly.
“The police view was that operation to a late hour was creating problems, but the members accepted the licence holder’s view, namely that the premises had operated to those hours since November 2015.
“The sub-committee also accepted that the premises was a safe space for the LGBTQ+ community, and agreed that such premises were valued by the community.
“The sub-committee accepted that the licence holder was a careful operator, and therefore did not see that the premises’ operating hours should be curtailed.”
The decision was made that all members of management at the premises shall receive first aid training to be refreshed every 12 months and that be recorded in a register. There was no restriction to hours.
BirminghamLive asked West Midlands Police about the marked change in position from the licensing application to the hearing and it said the ‘initial suggestion was a doorman at Glamorous was involved’ but ‘during the investigation further CCTV enquiries established that no doorman from the bar was involved’.
Regarding the investigation into the attack the police spokesman said: “We were called to reports of an assault outside a bar on Hurst Street, Birmingham in the early hours of Sunday 30 March.
“A man was injured and needed hospital treatment. No one has been arrested and our investigation is continuing.”
Source – Birmingham Mail
