'You Used Me As A Punch Bag... Then Played The Victim': Airport Cop's Fury As Manchester Attacker Is Jailed

A police sergeant whose nose was broken during the violent confrontation at Manchester Airport has delivered a devastating courtroom rebuke to the man who attacked her, accusing him of using her "as a punch bag" before portraying himself as the victim.

Mohammed Fahir Amaaz, 21, was sentenced to three-and-a-half years in prison after being convicted of assaulting two female police officers and attacking a member of the public during the chaotic incident at Manchester Airport's Terminal Two in July 2024.

'Take A Good Look At Me'

Addressing Amaaz directly in court, Sgt Lydia Ward described the lasting physical and emotional scars left by the attack.

She challenged him to look beyond her police uniform and see "a female" standing just 5ft 2in tall and weighing barely eight stone at the time of the assault.

"You used me as a punch bag," she told him. "But I will get back up and I will show you how strong I am."

Ward said Amaaz punched her with such force that he broke her nose, leaving her bloodied on the floor before turning his attention to fellow officer PC Ellie Cook.

"You changed my face," she told him. "What you did was cowardly."

Officer Says Amaaz 'Played The Victim'

Ward reserved some of her strongest criticism for what happened after the incident.

She accused Amaaz of exploiting viral mobile phone footage showing only the aftermath of the confrontation while ignoring the violence that preceded it.

"You are not a victim," she said.

"I am the one who was injured, not you. You allowed the public to feel sorry for you."

She added that Amaaz had shown "not one ounce" of remorse throughout the investigation and trial.

Attack Left Second Officer 'Broken'

PC Ellie Cook also described the devastating impact of the assault.

She told the court she had been struck repeatedly with such force she initially believed several people were attacking her.

The psychological trauma forced her to leave her firearms role, putting her long-held ambition of becoming a close protection officer on hold.

"I used to be happy," she said. "I used to be driven. I used to be focused. I am now broken."

Cook also revealed she had been forced to move home after her identity became widely known following the viral footage and subsequent online abuse.

Judge: 'Total Lack Of Remorse'

Sentencing Amaaz to 42 months in prison, Judge Neil Flewitt described all of the assaults as entirely unprovoked.

He rejected claims that the brothers had acted in self-defence, saying the officers posed no threat when they attempted to arrest Amaaz following an earlier assault on a passenger.

The judge also criticised Amaaz for continuing to portray himself as the victim despite overwhelming CCTV evidence.

"You sought to blame others for what was clearly your responsibility," the judge said.

Case Sparked National Controversy

The airport confrontation became one of Britain's most politically charged policing incidents after footage showing an armed officer kicking Amaaz while he lay on the ground spread rapidly across social media.

The clip prompted protests and allegations of police racism before CCTV later emerged showing the violent attacks on the officers moments earlier.

Amaaz was convicted of assaulting Sgt Ward, PC Cook and a member of the public.

However, after two separate juries failed to reach verdicts over allegations that Amaaz and his brother assaulted PC Zachary Marsden, prosecutors decided not to pursue a third trial.

Greater Manchester Police Chief Constable Sir Stephen Watson said assaults on officers could "never be justified", revealing that an average of 35 of his officers are assaulted every week across the force.

The Independent Office for Police Conduct continues investigating PC Marsden's actions during the arrest, including his kick to Amaaz's head, while a second officer also remains under investigation.

SOURCE

Another violent muslim criminal given an unduly lenient sentence by a liberal judge; the Attorney General’s Office needs to be asked to appeal this sentence under the “Unduly Lenient Sentence Scheme” for his appallingly violent assault on a policewoman.

Should have been ten years for attacking a cop.

UK needs to send a message to the thugs of the uk.

48 minutes ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

Another violent muslim criminal given an unduly lenient sentence by a liberal judge; the Attorney General’s Office needs to be asked to appeal this sentence under the “Unduly Lenient Sentence Scheme” for his appallingly violent assault on a policewoman.

3 1/2 years for the assault is not unduly lenient. It is severe. You label the judge liberal because you don't like the punishment handed out. You obviously know nothing about the man. He was called to the Bar in 1981, which makes him an older judge and from a generation that was not particularly known for Liberalism. He was appointed during the Conservative rule of David Cameron. His reputation is one of a upholding of the law, and nothing else. He gained his experience in the Liverpool courts where GBH and ABH cases are a way of life. Assaults like this typically get 18-24 months. Here it was 42 months. Did you read the judgement? The judge tore into the defendant.

The defendant is scum. We all know that, but he did not get off lightly. He is still at risk for a civil suit. If it was possible, I would rather see the defendant removed from the UK and sent to Pakistan. Unfortunately, that's not allowed. As for the tiny police officer at 5'2, she was obviously not physically appropriate for the job. She was not much use then and won't be much use in the future, if she continues as a firearms officer. Consider what the ramifications would be if a terrorist easily disarmed her. She says that she is considering a change in her specialty, and I see that as an unintended indirect benefit to the public because she was shown to be ineffective in her job.

1 hour ago, Patong2021 said:

3 1/2 years for the assault is not unduly lenient. It is severe. You label the judge liberal because you don't like the punishment handed out. You obviously know nothing about the man. He was called to the Bar in 1981, which makes him an older judge and from a generation that was not particularly known for Liberalism. He was appointed during the Conservative rule of David Cameron. His reputation is one of a upholding of the law, and nothing else. He gained his experience in the Liverpool courts where GBH and ABH cases are a way of life. Assaults like this typically get 18-24 months. Here it was 42 months. Did you read the judgement? The judge tore into the defendant.

The defendant is scum. We all know that, but he did not get off lightly. He is still at risk for a civil suit. If it was possible, I would rather see the defendant removed from the UK and sent to Pakistan. Unfortunately, that's not allowed. As for the tiny police officer at 5'2, she was obviously not physically appropriate for the job. She was not much use then and won't be much use in the future, if she continues as a firearms officer. Consider what the ramifications would be if a terrorist easily disarmed her. She says that she is considering a change in her specialty, and I see that as an unintended indirect benefit to the public because she was shown to be ineffective in her job.

In a judicial system that saw fit to sentence a woman to over 2½ years in prison for a tweet inciting racial hatred, that was only online for 3½ hours, I find it profoundly disturbing that anyone can think that 3½ years for this appallingly violent attack on a policewoman is not unduly lenient.

I doubt if you and I could agree on the colour of the sky.

Patong he was charged with ABH. Once you send someone to Hospital for Broken bones it becomes GBH. Amaaz should have been sentanced for comitting GBH that carries a 5 yr jail term. This Trial was always going to be difficult. Remember Amaaz brief coming on Camera claiming his victim was in Hospital with a possibility of a bleed on the brain caused by the police officers. All lies.

Ignoring the racial element.....attacking police in uniform should automatically mean double the sentence and no early release.

ssaulting a police officer causing Actual Bodily Harm (ABH) carries a statutory maximum sentence of 5 years in custody in the Crown Court, but sentences generally range from a community order up to 4 years imprisonment depending on the severity of the injury and your prior criminal record. [1, 2]

In England and Wales, these incidents can be prosecuted either under specific Assaults on Emergency Workers legislation or as Section 47 Assault (ABH). [1, 2, 3].

Id say Amaaz used a weapon namely his fists like it says above depends on the severity of the offence, this Female officer recieved a broken nose from a man needing hospital treatment which in my opinion is severe enough to warrent a GBH Charge that carries a minimun 10 yr sentance

6 minutes ago, BarraMarra said:

ssaulting a police officer causing Actual Bodily Harm (ABH) carries a statutory maximum sentence of 5 years in custody in the Crown Court, but sentences generally range from a community order up to 4 years imprisonment depending on the severity of the injury and your prior criminal record. [1, 2]

In England and Wales, these incidents can be prosecuted either under specific Assaults on Emergency Workers legislation or as Section 47 Assault (ABH). [1, 2, 3].

Id say Amaaz used a weapon namely his fists like it says above depends on the severity of the offence, this Female officer recieved a broken nose from a man needing hospital treatment which in my opinion is severe enough to warrent a GBH Charge that carries a minimun 10 yr sentance

I asked the question on google...............'can you be convicted of gbh in the UK for fighting with your fists'................

I have just pasted the first few AI answers below...............

Yes, you can absolutely be convicted of Grievous Bodily Harm (GBH) in the UK for fighting with your fists.

Under UK law, a GBH charge is determined by the severity of the injuries caused, not the weapon used. Bare-fisted punches can easily inflict "really serious harm," which fulfills the legal threshold for GBH. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

How Fisticuffs Lead to GBH Charges

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) categorizes injuries based on how severely they impact the victim. A fistfight moves past common assault or Actual Bodily Harm (ABH) into GBH territory if it results in: [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

• Broken or fractured bones (e.g., a broken jaw, nose, or cheekbone).

• Injuries requiring surgery or intensive medical treatment.

• etc etc...............

You have a case................

How slow the wheels of justice turn for the brotherhood' and not at all for this cousins' brother.

Facebook posters are jailed within a week cone throwers' get more bird'🤔

11 hours ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

In a judicial system that saw fit to sentence a woman to over 2½ years in prison for a tweet inciting racial hatred, that was only online for 3½ hours, I find it profoundly disturbing that anyone can think that 3½ years for this appallingly violent attack on a policewoman is not unduly lenient.

I doubt if you and I could agree on the colour of the sky.

You are so convinced of your imagined facts, that you are unwilling and unable to consider the actual facts of the cases you refer to. First the claim is made that a Conservative government appointed judge with a history of applying the law as intended was too "liberal". The facts of the case and the judge's history do not support that claim.

Next you demand that the judge is too liberal because he applied the law as written. A judge does not write the laws. he applies it. The law has been on the books since 1986. Successive Conservative governments had an opportunity to change it if it was that "bad" of a law. The penalty that was applied was rather more strict than the penalties applied on similar cases.

Next you go off on a tangent raising the Connolly case as if it was a harmless tweet that caused no harm. Well, it did, and she was held accountable for her attempts to incite arson and harm to others. Lucy Connolly, was charged on indictment with an offence of inciting racial hatred contrary to section 19(1) of the Public Order Act 1986 because of the following criminal message and her subsequent actions,

“Mass deportation now. Set fire to all the f** cking hotels full of the bastards for all I care. While you’re at it, take the treacherous government and politicians with them. I feel physically sick knowing what these families will now have to endure. If that makes me racist, so be it.”

• She intentionally wanted to cause arson and bodily injury to others. The fact that the potential deaths were prevented, does not relieve her of responsibility for what she did. Your logic is like a person who fails at a murder demanding to be released because the target was not killed. The woman was inciting violence against people and it was a contributing factor to the ensuing Southport riots.

• Her post was viewed 340,000 times and reposted 940 times.

• People who were arrested for vandalism and violence admitted to having read the message and incited to act out.

• When she was investigated, she intentionally lied and attempted to blame others for what she had done.

• The penalty given was light in consideration of what the law set out in Part III of the Public Order Act 1986 which provides for a maximum penalty of 7 years’ imprisonment. The much mentioned 31 month custodial sentence only required that 12 months be served in custody.

Edited Sunday at 05:53 PM2 days by Patong2021

11 hours ago, Off Piste said:

I asked the question on google...............'can you be convicted of gbh in the UK for fighting with your fists'................

I have just pasted the first few AI answers below...............

Yes, you can absolutely be convicted of Grievous Bodily Harm (GBH) in the UK for fighting with your fists.

Under UK law, a GBH charge is determined by the severity of the injuries caused, not the weapon used. Bare-fisted punches can easily inflict "really serious harm," which fulfills the legal threshold for GBH. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

How Fisticuffs Lead to GBH Charges

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) categorizes injuries based on how severely they impact the victim. A fistfight moves past common assault or Actual Bodily Harm (ABH) into GBH territory if it results in: [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

• Broken or fractured bones (e.g., a broken jaw, nose, or cheekbone).

• Injuries requiring surgery or intensive medical treatment.

• etc etc...............

You have a case................

GBH is defined, in case law, as a "really serious injury". Some broken noses are a really serious injury, eg, Mike Gatting's face.

The judge had to sentence on the basis the charge the CPS came up with. The CPs;s role is to secure a successful conviction. 1 in 3 appeals succeed, in throwing out the charge or reducing the sentence. GBH needs to be "really serious injury". A broken nose is an injury thats literally millimeters from being a really serious, life threatening injury and one which is considered. Look up the NHS advice about if you break your nose.

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/broken-nose/

You can usually treat a broken nose yourself. It should start getting better within 3 days and be fully healed within 3 weeks.

So there is clearly a wide spectrum in broken noses, and don't know the medical categorisation.

The CPS successfully convicted the man, and got decent sentence out of it.

The reference to fists as weapons reminds me of the Bruce Lee scene in Once Upon a Time in Hollywood.

15 hours ago, Patong2021 said:

3 1/2 years for the assault is not unduly lenient. It is severe. You label the judge liberal because you don't like the punishment handed out. You obviously know nothing about the man. He was called to the Bar in 1981, which makes him an older judge and from a generation that was not particularly known for Liberalism. He was appointed during the Conservative rule of David Cameron. His reputation is one of a upholding of the law, and nothing else. He gained his experience in the Liverpool courts where GBH and ABH cases are a way of life. Assaults like this typically get 18-24 months. Here it was 42 months. Did you read the judgement? The judge tore into the defendant.

The defendant is scum. We all know that, but he did not get off lightly. He is still at risk for a civil suit. If it was possible, I would rather see the defendant removed from the UK and sent to Pakistan. Unfortunately, that's not allowed. As for the tiny police officer at 5'2, she was obviously not physically appropriate for the job. She was not much use then and won't be much use in the future, if she continues as a firearms officer. Consider what the ramifications would be if a terrorist easily disarmed her. She says that she is considering a change in her specialty, and I see that as an unintended indirect benefit to the public because she was shown to be ineffective in her job.

Total agreement with most of what you have written to counter the race-baiting bigoted post, the likes of which had already contributed to the two earlier mistrials.

I disagree with your suggestion in your last sentence, based on this one-off altercation, that "little women" shouldn't be allowed to be firearms officers.

Any chance of him being deported when he's released.

7 hours ago, Patong2021 said:

You are so convinced of your imagined facts, that you are unwilling and unable to consider the actual facts of the cases you refer to. First the claim is made that a Conservative government appointed judge with a history of applying the law as intended was too "liberal". The facts of the case and the judge's history do not support that claim.

Next you demand that the judge is too liberal because he applied the law as written. A judge does not write the laws. he applies it. The law has been on the books since 1986. Successive Conservative governments had an opportunity to change it if it was that "bad" of a law. The penalty that was applied was rather more strict than the penalties applied on similar cases.

I have no idea why you are trying to politicise this, because it is irrelevant what government appointed the judge; and that notwithstanding, the judge has the sole responsibility of deciding the sentence.

The maximum sentence for Assault occasioning actual bodily harm (ABH) is 5 years (section 47)  or 7 years (section 29) if deemed to be racially or religiously aggravated.

Mohammed Fahir Amaaz attacked two female police officers and was convicted of ABH on one officer (Lydia Ward) assault of an emergency worker by beating (PC Ellie Cook) and assault by beating of a member of the public.

The ABH conviction alone was enough to trigger the maximum sentence of 5 years, yet even with the two other convictions he was only sentenced to 3 ½ years.

That any right minded person can think the sentence for this vile scumbag was not unduly lenient is profoundly disturbing. I can only hope that you are not a UK citizen with voting rights.

After attacking this police officer the suspect's face appears to be rather unscathed? In other parts of the world the suspect would have gotten an "attitude adjustment". At a certain central jail in the middle of a large city in America "special" inmates had their attitudes adjusted to ensure attacks against officer are curtailed. The adjustments occurred in areas of the facilities in camera dead zones. To the officer, I know getting punched in the face and noise (this from personal experience) hurts like hell but do not shed tears in view of the public. Instead show anger, resolve and ensure that this suspect is taken into custody with the "necessary" amount of legally authorized force. Legally authorized use of force is a flexible term.

Obviously, these new immigrants from Pakistan and India have no idea how to treat a lady, and why would they?

I tell you, Folks, culture is ingrained and more important than almost any other factor.

Note: But still, there is no crying in Baseball. If someone hits you in the nose, then just keep on slugging.

Edited Monday at 01:13 AM2 days by GammaGlobulin

Bear in mind, he will be automatically released at 21 months (50% of sentence). Early release programmes may lead him to being released even earlier than that.

5 minutes ago, Briggsy said:

Bear in mind, he will be automatically released at 21 months (50% of sentence). Early release programmes may lead him to being released even earlier than that.

Correct, plus the time he has been on remand, around 11 months.

He'll likely serve roughly another 10–15 months before release on license, depending on how the court calculated it.

8 minutes ago, Smokey and the Bandit said:

Correct, plus the time he has been on remand, around 11 months.

He'll likely serve roughly another 10–15 months before release on license, depending on how the court calculated it.

If he is still alive, of course.

There is somewhat of a solidarity between LE officials worldwide, and this schmuck bashed one of them.

3 minutes ago, bendejo said:

If he is still alive, of course.

There is somewhat of a solidarity between LE officials worldwide, and this schmuck bashed one of them.

Indeed, all we can hope for is 'real justice'?

40 minutes ago, bendejo said:

If he is still alive, of course.

There is somewhat of a solidarity between LE officials worldwide, and this schmuck bashed one of them.

40 minutes ago, bendejo said:

If he is still alive, of course.

There is somewhat of a solidarity between LE officials worldwide, and this schmuck bashed one of them.

Whilst I hope this disgusting criminal finds prison a horrible experience, I do feel you may have been watching too many Youtube videos. He will be treated according to the law in UK prisons. He will not be beaten up by prison officers let alone murdered by them.

3 hours ago, GammaGlobulin said:

Obviously, these new immigrants from Pakistan and India have no idea how to treat a lady, and why would they?

I tell you, Folks, culture is ingrained and more important than almost any other factor.

Note: But still, there is no crying in Baseball. If someone hits you in the nose, then just keep on slugging.

Indeed; and this is the conversation that both the UK muslim communities, and the left-wing activists want to shut down or ignore.

Muslim boys, particularly Pakistani boys, are taught from a very young age to subjugate women and treat them as second class within their insular communities; just ask any muslim woman that has had her divorce settled by a Sharia court, and notice how the overwhelming majority of the victims of so called “honour” killings, and HBA (honour based abuse) cases are female.

The boys grow up having no respect for any women apart from their mothers; even their own sisters do not escape the subjugation, and boys have been known to take part in the murder of their own sisters at the behest of the family hierarchy.

This culture is indoctrinated at a very young age and is irreversible, that is why it will always be incompatible with a civilised western society and will end with massive civil unrest in Europe.

9 minutes ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

Indeed; and this is the conversation that both the UK muslim communities, and the left-wing activists want to shut down or ignore.

Muslim boys, particularly Pakistani boys, are taught from a very young age to subjugate women and treat them as second class within their insular communities; just ask any muslim woman that has had her divorce settled by a Sharia court, and notice how the overwhelming majority of the victims of so called “honour” killings, and HBA (honour based abuse) cases are female.

The boys grow up having no respect for any women apart from their mothers; even their own sisters do not escape the subjugation, and boys have been known to take part in the murder of their own sisters at the behest of the family hierarchy.

This culture is indoctrinated at a very young age and is irreversible, that is why it will always be incompatible with a civilised western society and will end with massive civil unrest in Europe.

A bag of your customary gross perjorative generalizations.

4 hours ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

I have no idea why you are trying to politicise this, because it is irrelevant what government appointed the judge; and that notwithstanding, the judge has the sole responsibility of deciding the sentence.

The maximum sentence for Assault occasioning actual bodily harm (ABH) is 5 years (section 47)  or 7 years (section 29) if deemed to be racially or religiously aggravated.

Mohammed Fahir Amaaz attacked two female police officers and was convicted of ABH on one officer (Lydia Ward) assault of an emergency worker by beating (PC Ellie Cook) and assault by beating of a member of the public.

The ABH conviction alone was enough to trigger the maximum sentence of 5 years, yet even with the two other convictions he was only sentenced to 3 ½ years.

That any right minded person can think the sentence for this vile scumbag was not unduly lenient is profoundly disturbing. I can only hope that you are not a UK citizen with voting rights.

The penalty was no less severe than similar incidents.

There is no evidence that the assailant hit the WPC because she was a white person. It appears to have been more of an opportunistic attack by a bully.

I am not the one politicizing this. The claim was made that the judge and the penalty was "liberal". Nothing shows that it was.

The UK prisons are overcrowded. Until more prisons are built or the country goes back to executions for various criminal actions handing out lengthy jail sentences serves no point because it will require ither criminals be released early due to space limitations.

45 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

A bag of your customary gross perjorative generalizations.

Everything is true however, apart from my speculation of massive civil unrest in Europe, which is yet to happen.

However, you immediately manage to confirm my statement that those on the left want to shut down or ignore any conversation about Islam.

And as you have continually shown on this forum, if Islam is criticised in any way, shape, or form, you instantly become traumatised; so top marks for continuity.   

17 minutes ago, Patong2021 said:

The penalty was no less severe than similar incidents.

There is no evidence that the assailant hit the WPC because she was a white person. It appears to have been more of an opportunistic attack by a bully.

Neither I, nor the prosecution said he hit the WPC because she was white; he was prosecuted for ABH under section 47, not section 29, and the maximum sentence for ABH under section 47 is 5 years in prison, which I think he should have received, especially considering he was convicted of two other assault charges, one of them on another female police officer.

As I said, I find it disturbing that you think his sentence is right and just, especially if you are a UK citizen.

4 hours ago, sqwakvfr said:

After attacking this police officer the suspect's face appears to be rather unscathed? In other parts of the world the suspect would have gotten an "attitude adjustment". At a certain central jail in the middle of a large city in America "special" inmates had their attitudes adjusted to ensure attacks against officer are curtailed. The adjustments occurred in areas of the facilities in camera dead zones. To the officer, I know getting punched in the face and noise (this from personal experience) hurts like hell but do not shed tears in view of the public. Instead show anger, resolve and ensure that this suspect is taken into custody with the "necessary" amount of legally authorized force. Legally authorized use of force is a flexible term.

Sounds great over there in the land of the free incarcerated and the home of the brave thug.

31 minutes ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

Everything is true however, apart from my speculation of massive civil unrest in Europe, which is yet to happen.

However, you immediately manage to confirm my statement that those on the left want to shut down or ignore any conversation about Islam.

And as you have continually shown on this forum, if Islam is criticised in any way, shape, or form, you instantly become traumatised; so top marks for continuity.   

Gross perjorative generalizations are not ‘criticism’ they’re hate mongering.

So you think the sentance on this thug was correct and Justice correct according to British law Patong ?

Watch this and vid and come back if you still thinkOur justice system is correct. The Rapist was a Muslim. This was a Two Tier case.