Barrymore ‘should get damages over arrest which ended career’

ENTERTAINER MICHAEL Barrymore should get substantial damages from Essex Police over the wrongful arrest which destroyed his career, the High Court has heard.

Mr Barrymore, 65, was arrested and detained in June 2007 on suspicion of the rape and murder of 31-year-old Stuart Lubbock, who was found in the swimming pool at his Roydon home six years before.

Essex Police has now admitted the arrest was unlawful, as the arresting officer did not have reasonable grounds to suspect that Mr Barrymore was guilty.

But it is contended that the comedian and TV presenter could have been lawfully arrested by another officer and that, as a result, he is entitled only to nominal damages.

Mr Barrymore’s claim, including aggravated and exemplary damages, is in excess of £2.4m. He was in court in London yesterday to hear his counsel, Hugh Tomlinson QC, say that he had “great sympathy” for Mr Lubbock’s family and had always made it clear he would do whatever he could to assist them find out what happened.

“He has also made it clear he did not kill or assault Mr Lubbock. Although he was arrested, he was never charged with any offence and the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) subsequently made it crystal clear there was no basis for any charges.

“Our case is that when speculation, rumour and conjecture are put to one side, it is clear there is no evidence against the claimant in relation to any offence concerning Mr Lubbock.”

Mr Tomlinson told Mr Justice Stuart-Smith that Mr Barrymore remained convinced that Mr Lubbock’s injuries were not caused at his home but he did not know what happened.

He added: “This arrest was made without any proper evidential foundation. However, the fact that it had happened, and the worldwide publicity it received, destroyed the claimant’s career.”

Mr Tomlinson said that Mr Barrymore was entitled to substantial damages for false imprisonment.

Mr Barrymore is not due to give evidence during the five-day hearing, which is concerned with the issue of whether the damages should be substantial but will not fix a figure.

Mr Lubbock’s body was found in the pool after a party where drugs and alcohol were consumed.

A post-mortem examination later revealed that he had suffered serious internal injuries.

In 2002, an open verdict was recorded at the inquest into his death.

In May 2007, a forensic pathologist instructed by Essex Police said he did not consider there to be “any possible benign or accidental explanation” for the nature and extent of the injuries.

Mr Tomlinson said that there was “no evidence whatever” of rape and the cause of Mr Lubbock’s death could not be ascertained.

Mr Barrymore was keen to cooperate with the investigation and had been interviewed.

Mr Tomlinson said an arrest six years after the events in question was unnecessary to carry out an effective investigation.

John Beggs QC, for Essex Police, said it admitted the arrest was unlawful on the basis that the arresting officer did not have in his mind at the time reasonable grounds for suspecting Mr Barrymore of the offences for which he arrested him.

The case continues.