Appeal judges rule the chief constable ignored a court order to disclose arrest footage
The Court of Appeal has ruled that the chief constable of Northamptonshire Police was in contempt of court after failing to comply with an order requiring the force to disclose all body worn camera footage of a woman’s arrest. The ruling followed a long running dispute between the police and businesswoman Nadine Buzzard Quashie over video evidence linked to her arrest in 2021.
Ms Buzzard Quashie was arrested at her home on charges later dropped. She complained to the police, alleging she had been physically assaulted, thrown to the ground and had her face pushed into stinging nettles. To support the complaint she asked for the body worn camera footage. The Information Commissioner’s Office then ordered the release of all video of the arrest.
Dissatisfied with what the Court of Appeal described as piecemeal production and with the police explanation that footage had been deleted, Ms Buzzard Quashie obtained a county court order requiring full disclosure. The order was not followed. She applied to commit the chief constable for contempt but the application failed and costs were awarded against her.
On appeal, Lord Justice Fraser delivered the lead judgment, with Lady Justice Asplin and Lord Justice Coulson agreeing. The judge acknowledged what he called Ms Buzzard Quashie’s remarkable efforts to obtain all video footage. He said she had conducted herself in a measured and dignified manner throughout an extended saga. He also noted the resilience she had shown.
Embed from Getty Images
Lord Justice Fraser said the video footage whose existence had been denied by the chief constable on many occasions was finally discovered shortly before the Court of Appeal hearing. He said the discovery was possible because of the diligence of Charlotte Elves, who represented Ms Buzzard Quashie pro bono, and the perseverance of Elliot Gold, who was instructed by East Midlands Police legal department. He said that all statements made to the court before mid October 2025 were false and that the findings of His Honour Judge Genn, who rejected the contempt application, could no longer stand.
The court also thanked Janes Solicitors, which acted pro bono for Ms Buzzard Quashie. Witness statements filed by Simon Staples, the force’s in house solicitor, shortly before the appeal hearing showed that the position taken by the chief constable throughout the period was factually wrong. Audit logs for officers involved in the arrest led to the discovery of three video files that had not been disclosed.
The Court of Appeal found that Ms Buzzard Quashie was entirely vindicated on the facts. It said her refusal to accept that she had been given all footage was justified. The judges noted that the search of video material and the explanation ordered by the court in April 2023 were completed only in the final days before the appeal hearing. An email sent by the chief constable after the close of business the day before the hearing admitted the contempt for the purposes of the proceedings. An apology to Ms Buzzard Quashie and to the court was read out during the hearing.
Allowing the appeal on all grounds, the court made a finding of contempt. Lord Justice Fraser said the admission of contempt before the Court of Appeal supported the decision. He said the finding would vindicate the requirements of justice. He described the breach as wilfully disobedient and said it was clear that the order had been wholly ignored for many months.
The court reversed the costs order made against Ms Buzzard Quashie. The matter has been referred to the Independent Office of Police Conduct.