A man who was left paralysed in a wheelchair after police mistook him for a burglar and tasered him is suing the Met for £10million.

Leonard Sandiford, 65, was tasered off the top of a wall after a suspected burglary at an east London bookies in April 2022.

Officers believed he was the burglar and tried to stop him, but instead, he attempted to flee and climbed the wall before being blasted by the stun gun and tumbling to the ground.

The six-foot fall broke his back, leaving him paralysed.

He says cops were 'high-handed and oppressive' and used 'excessive and unjustified' force during the incident. 

Mr Sandiford has never been charged or arrested for any crime over the incident. 

He is now suing Met Commissioner, Sir Mark Rowley, for about £10m in compensation for 'assault and battery,' claiming firing the Taser at him was unnecessarily dangerous.

But lawyers for the Met are fighting the claim, arguing that Mr Sandiford brought the incident on himself by running off when police tried to stop him and creating a 'fast-moving, high-pressure...foot chase.'

The police claim Mr Sandiford was also on drugs and 'had in fact attempted to, or was in the process of, burgling the premises'.

According to documents filed for the case, Mr Sandiford was hit by the Taser after climbing onto a shed roof after police tried to stop him in Chigwell Road, Woodford Bridge.

His barrister Richard Gregory said: 'At a time when the claimant was attempting to leave the area and, in the course of doing so, had scaled a shed structure, PC Liam Newman discharged a Taser into the claimant, causing him to fall from height and sustain serious injuries, loss and damage.

'The nature and degree of force applied by PC Liam Newman to the claimant was unjustified, unreasonable and excessive and constituted assault and battery.'

He claimed that the PC - who was charged with assault, but later acquitted in a criminal court - 'could not reasonably have believed' that firing the Taser was 'a justified use of force in the circumstances'.

'His discharge of his Taser into the claimant, whilst he was at height in the particular circumstances, was an excessive and unreasonable use of force in all the circumstances,' argued the barrister.

Mr Sandiford's injuries left him an 'incomplete tetraplegic' and he was treated at a specialist neurological centre for over a year until his transfer to a care home in Stepney, east London.

As part of his claim, his lawyers say he now needs '24-hour care and assistance for all personal and domestic activities of daily living' and is 'wheelchair dependent for all mobility and requires a hoist for all transfers.'

He also seeks 'aggravated and exemplary damages' to mark the cop's allegedly 'high-handed and oppressive' conduct, including the use of 'excessive and unjustified' force.

PC Newman was charged and prosecuted over the Taser discharge, but was cleared of assault at Southwark Crown Court in January of this year.

At the High Court, the Met are disputing liability for Mr Sandiford's injuries, claiming he brought disaster on himself by trying to escape from pursuing police officers investigating a crime.

In its written defence to the claim, Met barrister George Thomas KC claimed Mr Sandiford was on heroin or cocaine when he was spotted by police at the wheel of a white van close to a bookmaker's shop to which they had been called by a member of the public.

The police also insist Mr Sandiford had 'removed some boards' from the bookies' and 'had in fact attempted to, or was in the process of, burgling the premises,' before trying to leave in the van when ordered to stop.

Mr Sandiford emerged from the van when PC Newman produced his Taser and told him, 'get out of the car now - on your knees', said the barrister, but once outside he started to run.

After an unsuccessful bid to grab Mr Sandiford, the suspect slipped through a gap in a fence and up onto a shed, where PC Newman ended up hitting him with the Taser charge.

In court documents, the Met's barrister said the constable had weighed up all the options before firing the weapon, firing it as a last resort as he realised Mr Sandiford was out of range of pepper spray and also fearing that he could pose a risk to people in a nearby house.

'PC Newman believed it was necessary to use force as a pre-emptive strike in order to prevent imminent harm coming to those inside a nearby address,' said Mr Thomas.

'PC Newman considered the options available to him. He assessed that the claimant was too far away from him for a baton strike to be effective, and that the use of PAVA spray would not be effective as the claimant was facing away from him.

'Accordingly, PC Newman believed that the only option available to him which was likely to be effective at that time in preventing danger to the occupants of the nearby house was to discharge his Taser.

'PC Newman discharged his Taser towards the claimant, but it was ineffective. At that point, he discharged his Taser for a second time and the Taser then appeared to affect the claimant, who took a couple of steps before falling forwards, down onto the ground beyond.

'It is not admitted that it was the effect of the Taser that caused the claimant to fall from the roof. Further or alternatively, it is not admitted that the claimant would not have fallen in any event.'

Far from PC Newman's response being an assault, it was in fact a reasonable and justified use of force when dealing with a suspected burglar, the Met's barrister argued.

'In all the circumstances, PC Newman was not in a position to weigh to a nicety the precise degree of force that it was reasonable to use,' he said.

'Notwithstanding that the claimant was at height at the time, the discharge of a Taser constituted a reasonable use of force in the circumstances as PC Newman reasonably believed them to be.'

In any event, Mr Sandiford brought disaster on himself by his actions, including consuming drugs and 'fleeing' from police, the Met claims.

'On his subsequent admission to hospital, the claimant reported having taken cocaine and heroin at about 1am. He was assessed as still intoxicated on his admission to hospital,' said the barrister.

'It is the defendant's case that, throughout the claimant's interactions with the officers, he was substantially intoxicated by his earlier consumption of cocaine and heroin.'

The case recently reached court for a pre-trial hearing discussing the disclosure of evidence for the forthcoming trial, which is scheduled for next year.

During the hearing, the judge, Master Irena Sabic KC, heard some of the evidence will focus on the 'mechanics' of the Taser injury and also the state of mind of PC Newman and whether he acted reasonably when deciding to use the stun weapon.

The Met's KC said the pursuit of Mr Sandiford occurred at night and lasted 'a matter of seconds'.

'It was clearly a fast-moving situation,' he explained. 'This was a foot chase at night and was clearly a high-pressure situation with the claimant trying to escape from the police.

'If that's not a fast-moving and high-pressure situation, I don't know what is.'

The case will return to court for a full trial next year, unless settled outside of court.