Manchester Arena bomber was challenged by witness

Salman Abedi was captured by CCTV on the day of the attack with a large backpack. (AFP)
Short Url
Updated 08 September 2020
Follow

Manchester Arena bomber was challenged by witness

  • Salman Abedi was reported to security on day of attack, but a man said he felt ‘fobbed off’
  • Inquiry into possible failings of police, security services, venue staff likely to continue into spring 2021

LONDON: An inquiry has heard that the Manchester Arena bomber was reported to venue security in the hours leading up to his attack, and challenged by a man who asked him: “What have you got in your rucksack?”

Salman Abedi detonated a suicide device in his backpack at an Ariana Grande concert in Manchester Arena in 2017, killing 23 people, including himself. 

An inquiry into the attack opened on Monday, and courts have heard that four witnesses saw Abedi acting suspiciously, including one who challenged him on the contents of his backpack.

“Evidence shows that at least once, and possibly on two occasions, someone drew attention to Salman Abedi acting suspiciously,” Paul Greaney QC, counsel to the inquiry, told the court. 

A father of children attending the concert said he noticed Abedi with a large rucksack in the arena’s mezzanine.

He saw him “sitting on the floor” and said he “thought the man looked out of place,” prompting him to approach Abedi.

“Witness A said, ‘It doesn't look very good, you know, what you see with bombs and such, and you with a rucksack like this in a place like this, what are you doing?’” Greaney told the court.

The attacker told him he was waiting for a friend, and when the witness reported him to venue security, he said he felt “fobbed off” by the disinterested guard.

A former member of the Armed Forces also raised concern about Abedi’s presence in the arena, telling security staff: “I’m ex-military and he shouldn’t be here.”

CCTV images show Abedi struggling with the weight of his bag, which contained roughly 6,000 metal screws and steel nuts, designed to cause maximum damage to people around him on detonation.

While security did monitor Abedi following the reports of his suspicious behavior, one of them told the police that he “froze” as he saw the man walking toward a group of young children and families leaving the concert, and that he “knew at that point it was too late.” Abedi detonated his bomb moments later. 

Another witness told the courts that she had reported Abedi to British Transport Police half an hour before the explosion after her colleagues saw him praying with a large backpack.

Security experts have told the courts that they believe “there was enough time” to acknowledge and respond to Abedi’s threat on the day of the attack.

CCTV footage shows Abedi had visited the venue multiple times ahead of the attack.

The inquiry is expected to continue into spring 2021, and will examine whether there was any failings by security services, the police or arena staff, and whether Abedi’s family radicalized him and his brother, who is also implicated in the attack.

The head of the inquiry told the court on Monday: “We’re not looking for scapegoats. We’re searching for the truth.”


London police using withdrawn powers to clamp down on pro-Palestine rallies: Probe

Updated 5 sec ago
Follow

London police using withdrawn powers to clamp down on pro-Palestine rallies: Probe

  • ‘Cumulative disruption’ cited to ban, reroute rallies but power granted by concept withdrawn by Court of Appeal in May
  • Network for Police Monitoring: This demonstrates ‘ongoing crackdown on protest’ that has reached ‘alarming point’

LONDON: London’s Metropolitan Police have used powers that have been withdrawn to clamp down on pro-Palestine rallies in the capital, legal experts have said.

The Guardian and Liberty Investigates obtained evidence that police officers had imposed restrictions on at least two protests based on the principle of “cumulative disruption.” But that power was withdrawn by the Court of Appeal in May, according to legal experts.

All references to cumulative disruption have been removed from relevant legislation, yet the Home Office and the Met continue to insist that police officers retain the power to consider the concept when suppressing protests.

On May 7, five days after the powers were withdrawn, the Met banned a Jewish pro-Palestine group from holding its weekly rally in north London, citing the cumulative impact on the neighborhood’s Jewish community.

Last month, the Met forced the Palestine Coalition to change the route of its rally on three days’ notice, highlighting the cumulative impact on businesses during Black Friday weekend.

Raj Chada, a partner at Hodge, Jones & Allen and a leading criminal lawyer, said: “There is no reference to cumulative disruption in the original (legislation). The regulations that introduced this concept were quashed in May 2025, so I fail to see how this can still be the approach taken by police. There is no legal basis for this whatsoever.”

The Met appeared “not to care” if it was acting within the law, the Network for Police Monitoring said, adding that the revelation surrounding “cumulative disruption” demonstrated an “ongoing crackdown on protest” that had reached an “alarming point” by police in London.

Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood announced plans in October to reintroduce the power to consider cumulative impact in toughened form.

But Nick Glynn, a retired senior officer from Leicestershire Police, said: “The police have too many protest powers already and they definitely don’t need any more. If they are provided with them, they not only use them (but) as in this case, they stretch them.

“They go beyond what was intended. The right to protest is sacrosanct and more stifling of protest makes democracy worth less.”

Cumulative disruption was regularly considered and employed in regulations if protests met the threshold of causing “serious disruption to the life of the community.”

The Court of Appeal withdrew the power following a legal challenge by human rights group Liberty.

Ben Jamal, the Palestine Solidarity Campaign’s director, was reportedly told by Alison Heydari, the Met’s deputy assistant commissioner, that her decision on imposing protest regulations “will be purely around the cumulative effect of your protests.”

She reportedly added that “this is not just about Saturday’s protest but it’s a combination of all the impacts of all the processions so far,” referencing “serious disruption” to the business community.

“You’ve used this route in November 2024, and you’ve used it a few times before then as well. So, there is an impact.”

The repeated disruption to PSC-hosted marches, the largest pro-Palestine events in London, was a “demobilizer,” Jamal said.

It also caused confusion about march starting points and led to protesters being harassed by police officers who accused them of violating protest conditions, he added.

A Met spokesperson told The Guardian: “The outcome of the judicial review does not prevent senior officers from considering the cumulative impact of protest on the life of communities.

“To determine the extent of disruption that may result from a particular protest, it is, of course, important to consider the circumstances in which that protest is to be held, including any existing disruption an affected community is already experiencing.

“We recognise the importance of the right to protest. We also recognise our responsibility to use our powers to ensure that protest does not result in serious disorder or serious disruption. We use those powers lawfully and will continue to do so.”