A Cotswold farming company director has won a court battle for the return of his shotgun licence after police revoked it because of an incident when a ten month old baby was found with the illegal drug Ecstasy in her mouth.

James Wills, 39, and his wife Daisy, of Syreford, near Andoversford, Glos, were hosting a get together with friends at their holiday cottage in Suffolk when the baby somehow ingested the Class A 'party drug' on July 10, 2020.

Police and paramedics attended the three bedroom cottage at Iken, Woodbridge, near Ipswich but fortunately the baby - the daughter of a friend of Mr and Mrs Wills - suffered no ill effects, Gloucester Crown Court was told on Monday (January 22).

However, the incident resulted in serious consequences for Mr Wills - Gloucestershire Constabulary decided that his 'lack of full co-operation' with police investigators meant he was no longer a person who could be trusted to keep shotguns.

The force revoked his shotgun certificate because they felt he had not displayed the 'high level of responsibility' required during the police inquiry into the incident, the court was told.

Father of two Mr Wills, a director of Eland Farms Ltd, whose parents Robert and Elizabeth are also directors, appealed against the revocation and at the end of a hearing at Cirencester Courthouse yesterday a judge, sitting with a magistrate, upheld his case and restored his certificate.

Gloucestershire Police superintendent Andrew Kilmurray told the court that reasons for the revocation of Mr Wills' certificate included the fact that he did not give the fullest possible information about the incident to investigating officers.

"There is a duty upon firearm and shotgun licence holders to co-operate with police investigations," he said. "The officers felt he did not co-operate fully with the investigation and did not give full information about the facts at the time.

"He did not give the officers details of the father of the child. He was asked for access to his mobile phone as part of the investigation but he refused to provide the PIN to unlock it so the officers could review it to see if there was any evidence there.

"He was asked if he or anyone else had taken drugs at the cottage that weekend and he replied that he would prefer not to say."

The Superintendent said the police have a duty to ensure people who are granted gun certificates "have a high level of responsibility."

He added "By failing to co-operate with the police I felt he fell short of that standard. We have a duty to keep people safe and to make sure people with shotgun certificates are responsible people and that they are held to a high standard to ensure the safety of the community."

Mr Wills had told the court he kept six shotguns 'of considerable age and quality' in his father's gun safe at home and needed a certificate because he hosts a commercial shoot on their land - and also uses a gun for the control of vermin.

Groups of between 6 and 10 people attended shoots at a cost of £15,000 a day on the farm, he said, and sometimes guests would need a gun replacing - something which he would be responsible for doing.

He said he and his wife had travelled on July 4, 2020, to the Suffolk cottage which she and her mother owned. Two friends and their children stayed with them for the first couple of days and then on July 6, the ten-month-old baby girl and her mother arrived, he said. Another couple arrived on July 8, and they all had a barbecue that evening.

Alcohol was being drunk by the adults at times but 'to my knowledge no-one was taking drugs,' he said.

He told the court he had no idea how the Ecstasy tablet which the baby somehow ingested had got into the house.

On the morning of July 10, he said, the baby's mother woke him early to say her daughter 'had a strange residue on her mouth.'

"I had a look at the baby and she did have a residue on her mouth," he said. "It was a very small amount and it I got an empty Calpol syringe and filled it with water to spray across her."

He said it was a 'very bright yellow/greenish colour and there was also some on the baby's nightwear and on the floor. He also saw a fragment of a tablet in the corner of her mouth, he added.

He said he decided immediately to call the emergency services, although the baby seemed well at that time, because no-one knew what the substance was.

Mr Wills denied that during his call to the East of England Ambulance Service he was 'cagey' about what had happened.

Cross-examined by Kannan Siva, representing Gloucestershire Police, Mr Wills agreed that he was later made aware, after scientific testing, that the substance was Ecstasy.

Mr Siva suggested "Wasn't it the case that you knew exactly what the baby had ingested because you had Ecstasy tablets at your house?' Mr Wills denied that was the case.

"I put it to you that it was not a question of guessing - you knew exactly what it was and that is what worried you?"

"No," said Mr Wills.

But he agreed that when he spoke to the Ambulance Service, he did mention Ecstasy. Asked by Mr Siva why that was he said "Because I couldn't think of anything else it could be, like a pesticide or something. It had been discussed between us all."

He denied Mr Siva's suggestion that he knew it was Ecstasy because he had seen it 'being handed around earlier at the cottage.'

He said he had no personal experience of using Ecstasy.

Mr Wills was asked why, when later interviewed by the police about the incident, he declined to answer some questions and would not supply the PIN for his phone. He said this was on the advice of his solicitor.

He agreed that when asked if there had been any drugs used in the cottage he replied "I prefer not to say."

His wife, Daisy, told the court that the bedroom used by the mum and baby had been occupied earlier by a couple of friends and she had given it a 'rough clean' and stripped and re-made the bed after they left. She wished she'd had more time to 'do a better job' of the cleaning, she said.

On the morning of 10th July, she said, the baby's mother seemed concerned and told her the infant appeared to have 'eaten something which looks strange, and she is grimacing.'

"It was a yellow and chalky substance," she said. "We didn't know what it was. The baby had spat it out and was grimacing so we thought we needed to figure out what it was."

She said she and her husband were 'eager to act responsibly and make sure everyone was safe.'

From life experience, she said, they thought it might be Ecstasy because of the colour.

"We all instantly agreed that if it was it was very serious and it would be worth calling the ambulance immediately. James took charge of that. But there was nothing wrong with the baby at any point and we were quietly confident we would be causing a fuss over nothing."

Mr Wills' barrister, Leon Kozakos KC, asked "To your knowledge, was any guest or resident of that property, while you were there, taking drugs?" She replied "Absolutely not."

She said it was not until six weeks later that it was confirmed to be Ecstasy.

Mr Siva asked her if she had any idea how the drug got into the cottage and she said she did not - but she added that the cottage was rented out to the public and there had been occasional stag do's there, with some people staying in tents in the grounds.

Asked how she was able to say that the tablet might be Ecstasy she said "We've all had lectures at school about what drugs look like."

Former army officer Harry Amos told the court he had been staying at the cottage that weekend but he did not see anyone taking drugs.

He said he thought the police who attended the cottage 'seemed a little bit pushy' with Mr Wills.

He had known Mr Wills for many years and he was a man of impeccable character, a man of his word and a 'consummate host,' he said.

Another witness, Christopher Ramsey, 39, who works for a sustainable farming company, told the court Mr Wills is "100 percent honest, integrity is him. He is about as honest as it gets. I have never seen him under the influence of drugs. I have never heard him speak about drugs. "

In a final speech to the court Mr Siva said: "The evidence shows that Mr Wills and his wife were not able to control the substances that were on the property and it also appears to show that he tried to cover up for his friends, at the very least.

"We have a ten month old girl suffering some adverse effects from taking a highly toxic Class A drug. If there was a failure by the appellant to maintain a safe environment it is relevant to the issue of gun control. He was evasive about his knowledge of the drug and how it got onto the property."

Mr Kozakos told the court "He is a fundamentally serious, honest and decent man who has a very good reason, running a farm, to be the continued recipient of a shotgun certificate."

Mr Kozakos pointed out that the police had in due course been able to access Mr Wills' phone and nothing of any relevance to the incident had been found on it.

Judge Ian Lawrie KC said the court had decided to allow the appeal and restore the certificate to Mr Wills having had the benefit of hearing and seeing him and his 'quality' witnesses give evidence - something the police had not been able to do.

The court would state its full reasons for allowing the appeal at a later date, he said.