A police officer described how he and a colleague were put at risk by an anti-fracking protest on a tanker delivering to the Horse Hill oil well near Gatwick.
PC Paul Quinn, a member of Surrey Police protester removal team, was giving evidence at the trial of a group of campaigners opposed to operations at the well.
He told the court in Redhill that one of the campaigners, Ben Hewitt, had climbed on top of the tanker on 11 March this year.
PC Quinn said he and a colleague joined Mr Hewitt on the tanker roof after he refused to come down.
“This was the third person I had dealt with in this situation”, PC Quinn said
“This was the first time I had been met by such a dangerous situation where all three of us were in danger of falling.”
He said Mr Hewitt had jumped from the back of the tanker across a gap of 1.5m and landed on the roof of the articulated unit. After they spoke to him he shuffled forward so that his feet were dangling over the windscreen, PC Quinn said.
“He was 15ft from the ground with no safety barriers”, PC Quinn said. “We hauled him back to the centre of the cab”.
“The male was extremely aggressive. He was pushing. He was kicking out and he was trying to make contact.
“I had to use all my efforts to contain the male and secure myself on the roof.”
PC Quinn said he and his colleague had used climbing equipment to clip themselves to the tanker and to Mr Hewitt. If they had fallen they would not have hit the ground, he said. But they could have been impaled on the vehicle.
The court heard how the officers forced Mr Hewitt, against his will, into a safety harness. He asked to use an inhaler but PC Quinn said when they allowed him to reach for it in his pocket he tried to remove the harness.
If he went off the front of the truck he would have dragged me with him, PC Quinn said.
The court heard how the officers used a pressure point technique to subdue Mr Hewitt . PC Quinn said:
“I grabbed him by the neck and held him by his cheeks.
“Because of the situation it was the only position I could guarantee I could get enough leverage.”
“Actions went far beyond what was necessary”
Laura Collier, representing Mr Hewitt, put it to PC Quinn: “He said he was struggling to breathe.”
PC Quinn said: “He was allowed full access to his inhaler”.
Ms Collier said: “He was telling you he could not breathe”.
PC Quinn replied: “I cannot recall that”.
Ms Collier put it to PC Quinn that Mr Hewitt was worried that the ladder which the police wanted him to use to get to the ground was not secure. She said to PC Quinn:
“You were not communicating about what you were doing and that made him panic.”
“Your actions went far beyond what was necessary.”
PC Quinn replied: “This is the third person I have taken off these structures. I don’t accept what you say.”
The court also saw video evidence about another campaigner who tried to climb onto the tanker on the same day and two who locked themselves together outside the site entrance on 18 March.
All nine people on trial deny the charges against them, which include obstructing the highway, tampering with a vehicle and resisting arrest.
The prosecution offered no evidence against a tenth Horse Hill campaigner.
The case continues on Friday at Guildford Magistrates Court and is scheduled to last until Tuesday next week.
DrillOrDrop always welcomes comments on posts. In order to keep the comments area safe and legal, DrillOrDrop has a new commenting policy which you can read here.
Categories: Legal
DRILL OR DROP? 
I thank all the protectors at Horse Hill for everything they did to bring to the attention of the wider public the inherent risks to us all from these drilling operations. I thank you, too, Ruth Hayhurst, for continuing to chronicle the important history of resistance to this industry. Thank you.
Julie your comment is ridiculous and infuriating in the extreme, you should be ashamed to put your name to this post, but no doubt you and the other anti-frackers who support such behaviour will see these morons as some sort of crusaders.
You’re thanking criminals, thanking them for putting innocent people’s lives at risk by their ridiculous actions. I hope they and others feel the full force of the law.
Michael aren’t you aware of the risks to ‘innocent people’s lives’ inherent with the FRACKING Process? Perhaps not obvious risks such as falling from a vehicle or as quick but Protestors are aware which is why they are protesting because for all ‘our democracy’ that we have just reclaimed, MPS/ energy bosses/ police aren’t listening!
So I too THANK the protestors for being brave and motivated enough to use our right to protest!
Protest all you like Helen. I’m not against free will in any way but the actions of your heroes are disgraceful, just as those are including you who hold these morons in some kind of awe.
Your claims of danger to innocent people’s lives because of the fracking process has no basis of proof. Please provide details of any person who has died or been injured because of fracking.
I truly hope the law deals with these morons in the most severe way. Your condoning of their behaviour is a disgrace
A shale gas site would be dealing with a constant stream of explosive gas. Mixed with that gas would be other gases dangerous to human health. Returning fluids would contain fluids dangerous to health. 1 multi well pad costs £333, 000,000 to bring online. A huge amount of infrastructure and machinery.
Pennsylvania Supreme Court has declared that unconventional gas development is a heavy industrial use that brings round-the-clock noise and light, dust, flaring, truck traffic, risks of explosion and industrial-scale emergencies, including evacuations.
Would you be comfortable living less than 300 metres from this with the ones you love? Myself and tens of thousands of others are not.
Just to point out that Horse Hill is a conventional oil well (they would have to apply for additional permissions if they wanted to fracture) like many small wells all over the country. Wych Farm in Dorset is about 2 miles from Poole Harbour and some of the most beautiful scenery in Britain. It is screened by forest and after initial objections like we see in Blackpool at the moment, has proved to be a good neighbour in the area. Horse Hill could contribute 1000 barrels of oil a day which means less imports from the Middle East. Sorry if you drive a car, burn gas at home, or use plastic in any way, you need this “industry”.
At 12-24 on 9th July you posted on this site that the UK has no home grown gas. You did not know we had a North Sea Industry and yet you still post regarding UK fuel requirements. I am glad the Industry and Investors monitor this site.
John, I did not choose my words carefully, I am of course aware of the North Sea contribution. I should note that the National Grid recently predicted that by 2040, 93% of our gas would be imported.
Mark, as you say “Wych Farm is Dorset is about 2 miles from Poole Harbour and some of the most beautiful scenery in Britain. It is screened by forest”. However it isn’t a fracking site. The Fylde where Cuadrilla wants to frack and Kirby Misperton which has recently been given permission to frack will be fracking sites with all that that implies. And last time I looked there were no forests to be seen near either of those places.
I thought this thread was about protests against conventional drilling at the Horse Hill development site.
Indeed few trees at the Fylde site, why not plant some, absorb some CO2 in the process.
The Wych Farm site by the way is an interesting development. It involves a horizontal well which travels 8 kilometres underground under the Dorset coast and takes oil from a reservoir under the Channel. The extracted oil then travels to near Southampton via a pipeline for refining.
Where shall we begin Michael?
‘Sir Robert Wilson, BG Group chairman, said the “very disappointing” safety decline occurred in parts of its contractor workforce – a year after the company vowed to focus on improving safety for contractors. The accidents included three fatalities among people working “on behalf” of BG Group.
BG Group said the decline from a “previously improving trend” was, for the most part, “due to the ramp-up in onshore unconventional gas activity”.’
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/oilandgas/9186378/BG-Group-chief-Sir-Frank-Chapman-regrets-unacceptable-doubling-of-worker-accidents.html
Death on the Job, a May 2014 report from the US national safety federation AFL-CIO, included a stark warning about the occupational risks of America’s fracking-fuelled oil and gas boom.
The union body noted deaths in the oil and natural gas industry were up by 23 per cent in 2012 alone. It traces the upward trend back to 2008 and the creation of fracking boom towns. In February 2014, a worker died when a Chevron fracking well in a small Pennsylvania town exploded. The fire burned for five days.
Hmmm. But that’s just the workers of course, so perhaps they don’t matter? How about the increase in road deaths from fracking related incidents? http://bakken.com/news/id/223606/fracking-related-traffic-deaths-growing-concern/
Do we need go on Michael? How much detail do you need?
Cheap shot reply Lisa.
Trying to draw workplace injuries/accidents into this discussion shows how low you anti’s will go.
You asked for details of any people who have died or been injured because of fracking Michael. How about the increased road deaths? Do you consider that a cheap shot too or was your question merely an attempt to imply there were no deaths or injuries caused by fracking and hope people took your word for it?
Workplace injuries/deaths are an unfortunate risk all workers take in any industry, just as road accidents occur for many reasons that may result in death.
[Edited by moderator]
Pathetic attempt at justification.
Yes you are right my post is pathetic, pointless, and irrelevant. Your comments however must be turning thousands of anti frackers into believers in the industry……
I am so glad you are spearheading the pro fracking debate.
Spearheading? How do you work that out?
There are many more pro-frackers who are a lot more qualified than me to claim that title but thanks for the compliment.
Michael, where is your evidence for calling these people “morons”? The word “protesters” is also a misnomer as these are “protectors” operating “protection” for the community, by the community, while monitoring bad practice by the companies involved. My comment may be “frustrating” for you to read but you’ll have to get used to it – as there is more public support in opposing fracking in the UK as shown by the Dept of Energy & Climate Change’s last report than there is support for it. Look up The List of the Harmed.
Morons, protesters, protectors (thats a joke!), open to debate, but law breaker and serial protester definitely apply. I wonder if he works and contributes to society or just takes? Not the first time he has been involved in this kind of incident. And clearly not local, based on the address provided to the Court.
What a joke your comments are Julie.
Protectors ? You are deranged if you truly see these morons as that.
Let’s hope a severe financial penalty is applied to your protectors. I’d much prefer to see them squirm and struggle in paying a fine than spending time in a correctional facility.
I wonder if the 2 policeman involved and whose lives your protectors placed in danger would agree with you, Helen, John Powney. I dare say they’d be appalled.
Julie, Everyone has the right to lawful protest but this was not lawful protest. What would you expect to happen if someone, who thought solar farms or wind turbines were an eyesore, decided to destroy them. You would expect them to be dealt with by the law. That’s why we have law, to protect the interests of everyone, whatever their point of view. The police have an incredibly difficult job to do when they come between two competing interests. They are just ordinary people trying to do a professional job.
Thank you John Powney for your excellent comments! And Michael, you are right – there are far better qualified people to speak about fracking, you are clearly uninformed – even on Wytch Farm. See following incidents (and best do some genning up). “5 February
2013
Wytch Farm, Dorset Carbon monoxide emissions exceeded
the limit two days in a row
when the Waste Heat Recovery
Unit was brought online during
maintenance works on the gas
turbines.
9 March
2013
Wytch Farm, Dorset Approximately 560kg (1,235lbs)
of gas and 13,600 litres (2,992
gallons) of crude oil and produced
water was released as a spray that
covered 10,800 square metres
(116,250 square feet) of drill pad
and a land management area north
east of the site.
4 June 2013 Wytch Farm, Dorset Low fuel levels in the gas turbines
caused the Waste Heat Recovery
Unit to come online and exceeded
carbon monoxide limits.
3
23 July
2013
Wytch Farm, Dorset A breach of carbon monoxide
limits occurred when a problem
with the gas turbine demineralisation
system caused the Waste Heat
Recovery Unit to come online.
5 September
2013
Wytch Farm, Dorset A water pipe on the demineralisation
system serving two gas turbines
was damaged and put the
turbines out of action. No carbon
monoxide was sampled but the
operator stated that levels would
have exceeded the limits.
7 September
2013
Wytch Farm, Dorset A faulty damper caused two gas
turbines to trip and the Waste Heat
Recovery Unit to come online. No
samples of carbon monoxide were
taken, but the operator stated that
levels would have exceeded the
limits.
11 October
2013
Wytch Farm, Dorset The Waste Heat Recovery Unit
started when a shutdown of the
gas plant occurred, causing carbon
monoxide limits to be breached.
4
16 October
2013
Wytch Farm, Dorset The Waste Heat Recovery Unit
was put online for six hours and
despite carbon monoxide samples
were not recorded, the operator
stated that the limits would have
been breached.
26 October
2013
Wytch Farm, Dorset The Waste Heat Recovery Unit
was put online in order to stabilise
hot oil temperature for 24 hours,
causing carbon monoxide levels to
exceed the limits.
4 December
2013
Wytch Farm, Dorset 15,000 litres (3,300 gallons) of
crude oil and produced water and
70,000 litres (15,398 gallons) of
gas spilled from a pinhole leak in
a production line thought to have
been the result of corrosion. All
the liquid was contained on site,
but some gas drifted off the island.
4 December
2013
Wytch Farm, Dorset Spot samples revealed that carbon
monoxide emissions exceeded
acceptable levels from the Waste
Heat Recovery Unit at the Gathering
Station.
8 January
2014
Singleton, West Sussex
An estimated 10 litres (2 gallons)
of crude oil was released and dispersed
as a fine film in the wind
when the 12mm stainless steel
instrument tubing failed at a compression
fitting.
27 January
2014
Manchester Ship
Canal, Manchester
A BBC Inside Out programme
revealed that almost 8,401,000
litres (1,848,000 gallons) of radioactive
produced water from the
Preese Hall fracking well had been
discharged into the Manchester
Ship Canal in 2011 after the fluids
had been classed as an industrial
effluent rather than radioactive
waste under the regulations in
force at the time.
5
2 February
2014
Barton Moss, Salford
A number of photos were published
showing issues with HGVs
making deliveries to the site.
These included a screwdriver that
was used in place of a safety pin, a
rubber glove being used to replace
a missing cap on a fuel tank and
chemicals dripping onto the road
from the rear of a tanker.
16 February
2014
Wytch Farm, Dorset A breach in the limits of oxides of
nitrogen was recorded at the
Waste Heat Recovery Unit at the
Gathering Station after a suspected
restriction in the water injection
line in the gas turbines.
18 February
2014
Wytch Farm, Dorset Carbon monoxide emissions from
the Waste Heat Recovery Unit at
the Gathering Station exceeded
the approved limit.
8 March
2014
Wytch Farm, Dorset Carbon monoxide emissions from
the Waste Heat Recovery Unit as
the Gathering Station exceeded
the approved limit. Three days
later, the environmental permit for
the site was amended and the operator
was no longer required to
report any future limit breaches to
the Environment Agency.”
Thank you for the comments, I’ve no doubt that accidents (and sometimes due to willful neglect) occur in industry. I’m no expert but I suspect the fact that CO levels exceeded limits is not right but whether they actually resulted in harm is another matter. Not sure how many people have lost their petrol cap and replaced it with some gash-up. Do you think Environmental Agency would actually have removed the need to report breaches if they thought anyone was actually at risk. I may be trusting but I suspect not. Again it’s all a matter of risk versus rewards, building houses is dangerous to a degree, agriculture is dangerous to a degree, off-shore gas exploration, nuclear power, coal mining, all dangerous. But what’s the alternative and how do the risks compare with each other and compare with the risks of hydraulic fracturing.
And Mark, we have a democratic right to protest and also a right to self defence. Communities all over the UK are acting in self defence against this industry.
Protest all you like but don’t break the law………simple really Julie, [edited by moderator]
Michael, I think you will find that with the vast majority of site “protests” where police have brought charges, the case against the protester/protector has actually been dismissed. This has led to extreme criticism of policing at sites where curfews and orders restraining people from returning to the site have been found to have been illegal restrictions the democratic right of people to protest – by operating, if you will, “an injunction by the back door”. All police charges are considered to be breaches of the law – until they are dismissed in court.
Michael Dobbie …. i think you’ll find it is the government, local councils and the police who are breaking the laws … they are breaking their own laws… they are sworn public servants… their role is of protecting public interest / acting for the public good …. while really what they do is serve private/corporate interest … change laws in order to better serve corporate interests … our system is corrupt to the core, with government officials on corporate committees and trusts …. they given large amounts of money for attending corporate dinners … they selling off our land, our schools are getting privatised (academy’s – council owned now being transfer to private ownership) … when government tells council planning to ignore global health reports in regard to risks of fracking when deciding to allow planning for frack sites …. there is a serious problem …. wake up dude
Niorneil, what a load of dribble!
What do you propose is done? End democracy and replace it with what? Why not leave the UK as things are so bad? North Korea may suit you better?
And maybe some nice area of Pennsylvania might suit you, Paul Tresto – somewhere that’s been fracked beyond remediation and left as a sacrificial zone to this toxic industry, peut-etre? I’m sure you’d love that – not least because I see you’re a regular contributor to these pages from other comments such as: “Paul Tresto
June 13, 2016 at 7:42 pm
Ken – A HVHPHF is not technically appropriate for the Kimmeridge Limestone and would achieve little at great cost. If it was my well I would be looking at a nice big acid frack to increase productivity. Several hundred thousand gallons of 28% HCl should do the trick.” I wonder, in fact, if you and “Michael” and “Ken” are all not one and the same, “Paul”. Are you talking to yourself, I wonder? On this side of the argument, I can vouch for the fact that no-one’s listening to you. Have a good evening.
Now that is a funny post Julie ☺. You’re obviously listening to Paul, you responded to him, or is it me or perhaps Ken you’re responding to?
My goodness you have provided us with some gems in the past but this one is a ripper.
Keep it up Julie, a touch of humour is appreciated.
Happy living in the UK thanks Julie. Even if I wanted to go to the US it would be difficult for me to get a visa as I regularly visit one of their black listed countries on holiday. But please advise what you find technically wrong with acid fracking kimmeridge limestone? Have you ever been on a frack job? No, I thought not. Ken may have been, Michael probably not. But let them answer. I understand that an acid wash was used on the well. Someone on this Bb mentioned it. HCl is used in many industries including water treatment. Let’s wait and see if they do get round to acid fracking down there. Ultimately the petrophysicists and petroleum engineers will make that decision, not you. You can object to traffic, noise and visual impact. Subsurface is outside the planners realm. And 99% of people on this bb have no experience or understanding of the technical aspects of drilling a water well never mind an oil and gas well.
I would have hoped that by now you are smart enough to see that we are not one and the same. It makes no difference to me or the planning system if anyone listens to me or not. But i believe Ruth likes to hear from people who have worked in the industry. Debate requires both sides. Objecting to something requires a full understanding of the subject.
Julie, you may have a legal and moral right to self-defence against someone threatening you personally but, against an industry? Not when that industry is already governed and controlled by reams of correct, proper and democratically backed regulation already designed to protect you.
John Powney, I would very much welcome the chance to be in touch with you.