Hashem Abedi, the convicted Manchester Arena bomb plotter, has once again thrust himself into the British legal spotlight, this time by refusing to appear in court on charges of attempting to murder prison officers. The 28-year-old, already serving a record-breaking 55-year minimum life sentence for his role in the 2017 terror attack that killed 22 people at an Ariana Grande concert, is now facing new and serious allegations stemming from a violent incident at HMP Frankland, a maximum-security prison in County Durham.
According to Sky News and corroborated by multiple outlets including BBC, The Mirror, The Sun, and Evening Standard, Abedi was scheduled to appear via videolink at Westminster Magistrates' Court on September 18, 2025. However, he refused to leave his cell at HMP Belmarsh in southeast London, declining both to attend the hearing and to accept legal representation. This act of defiance forced Chief Magistrate Paul Goldspring to adjourn the proceedings and consider alternative measures to secure Abedi’s attendance for the next hearing, now set for September 25.
The charges against Abedi are grave. Prosecutors allege that on April 12, 2025, he attempted to murder three prison officers—Paul Crampton, Gary Speight, and Catherine Herbert—and caused actual bodily harm to a fourth, Craig Thompson. The attack reportedly involved the use of hot oil and improvised blades, with Abedi allegedly taking advantage of his access to a 'self-cook kitchen' within the prison. The officers, two men and a woman, suffered life-threatening injuries, including burns, scalds, and stab wounds. Three were hospitalized after the ambush, which the Prison Officers Association described as “unprovoked” and “vicious.”
Counter Terrorism Policing North East (CTPNE), which led the investigation alongside Durham Constabulary and HMP Frankland, stated that Abedi threw boiling hot liquid over prison staff before assaulting them with makeshift weapons. At the time of the attack, the Prison Officers Association said, “The staff sustained life-threatening injuries including burns, scalds, and stab wounds.” The prosecution is treating the offences as having a terrorist motivation, a chilling echo of Abedi’s previous crimes.
Chief Magistrate Goldspring made clear his frustration with the legal impasse. As reported by BBC, he told the court, “I have no power to deal with him in his absence,” and indicated that he would write to the prison to explore whether force could be used to bring Abedi before the court. Goldspring also suggested that, failing physical attendance, a videolink could be set up in Abedi’s cell. “At worst, they could put a laptop in his cell, if he won’t come out of the cell. If we are satisfied it’s him, that’s enough for sending,” he remarked, as quoted by the Evening Standard.
The court’s ability to proceed is complicated by Abedi’s refusal of legal counsel and his repeated noncompliance with court protocol. The magistrates’ court is required by law to formally identify the defendant before the case can move forward. Goldspring noted that the prison governor has the authority to authorize the use of force if necessary, though there are logistical hurdles, including the potential reluctance of private contractor Serco, responsible for courthouse security, to physically move Abedi into the dock.
This is not the first time Abedi has disrupted judicial proceedings. As noted by The Mirror, he previously failed to appear for his sentencing hearing at the Old Bailey in 2020, having dismissed his legal team and refusing to participate in his murder trial. His current stance appears to be a continuation of that pattern, further complicating the legal process and frustrating the court’s efforts to ensure justice is served.
Abedi’s history is as notorious as it is tragic. In August 2020, he was convicted for assisting his brother, Salman Abedi, in planning and executing the Manchester Arena bombing. The attack, which targeted concert-goers—many of them children and teenagers—was one of the deadliest acts of terrorism in recent UK history, leaving 22 dead and hundreds injured. Abedi was handed a life sentence with a minimum term of 55 years, the longest ever imposed in a British court for terrorism-related offences.
Since his incarceration, Abedi has remained a controversial figure. The Sun recently reported that he had his prison privileges upgraded from “basic” to “standard” following a period of good behavior, granting him access to a TV package, more cash for phone credit, and use of the gym. However, these privileges were accompanied by restrictions: Abedi was moved to HMP Belmarsh and barred from contacting under-18s, amid fears he might attempt to radicalize young inmates from behind bars.
Financially, Abedi’s legal battles have also drawn public scrutiny. In May 2025, he was granted over £1,200 in legal aid to pursue an equal rights complaint in prison, which he claimed was based on religious discrimination. Despite his refusal to participate in court proceedings, figures obtained under a Freedom of Information request revealed that his total legal aid bill has ballooned to £354,015, largely to fund his trial defense and related legal actions.
The current case is set to be transferred to the Crown Court due to the seriousness of the charges. As the process unfolds, the court is awaiting a report from the prison explaining Abedi’s absence at the most recent hearing. Judge Goldspring has ordered the file to be marked as “defendant has refused to attend,” though this may be updated if further information emerges.
For the victims of the April 12 attack and their families, the legal wrangling is a painful reminder of the dangers faced by those who work in Britain’s prison system—especially when dealing with inmates convicted of terrorism. The Prison Officers Association has repeatedly called for greater protection and support for its members, emphasizing the risks posed by high-profile offenders like Abedi.
As the next court date approaches, all eyes will be on whether Abedi will finally face the charges in person or via videolink, and whether the justice system can navigate the challenges posed by his continued resistance. The outcome will not only determine Abedi’s future but will also set a precedent for how the courts handle similarly disruptive defendants in the years to come.
The saga of Hashem Abedi, from his involvement in one of Britain’s darkest days to his ongoing defiance within the prison system, continues to test the limits of the legal process—and the patience of a nation still scarred by his crimes.
