Manchester Airport Multitool Case Ends in Suspended Sentence 2026

Key Points

• Leon Adams-Entwistle, aged 28, pleaded guilty to having a bladed article in a public place.
• The article was a multitool with an axe blade at its tip.
• He was apprehended at Manchester Airport transport interchange on November 3, 2025.
• A four-month jail term was imposed by Manchester Magistrates’ Court, but it was suspended for 18 months.
• Adams-Entwistle is to undertake a 26-day programme and follow the instructions of the responsible officer.
• He also pleaded guilty to not surrendering to Manchester Magistrates’ Court on February 17, 2026.
• No additional punishment was imposed for the failure to surrender charge.
• The multitool was ordered to be confiscated and destroyed.
• He was also made to pay £85 towards prosecution costs.
• The court list said that the offence was a serious one, warranting a custodial sentence.

Manchester Crime ( Manchester Mirror) September 19, 2026 – Leon Adams-Entwistle has received a suspended four-month prison sentence after admitting that he possessed a multitool with an axe on the end at the airport’s transport interchange.

The case was reported by The Oldham Times in a court report published on September 19, 2026. The report stated that Adams-Entwistle, aged 28 and from Elizabeth Avenue in Chadderton, pleaded guilty to possessing a bladed article in a public place.

According to the report, the offence took place at Manchester Airport on November 3, 2025. Adams-Entwistle was found with the tool at the airport transport interchange, an area used by passengers and members of the public travelling to and from the terminals.

Manchester Magistrates’ Court later sentenced him to four months in custody. The sentence was suspended for 18 months, meaning he was not immediately sent to prison, provided he complies with the conditions imposed by the court during the suspension period.

Why was a prison sentence suspended?

The court imposed a custodial term but suspended it for 18 months. This means the four-month sentence remains in place and may be activated if Adams-Entwistle commits further offences or fails to comply with relevant requirements during the suspension period.

The report did not state that Adams-Entwistle had been sentenced to immediate imprisonment. Instead, it said the custodial term was suspended and that he must complete a 26-day programme.

He must also follow the instructions of a responsible officer. The court’s requirements therefore combine a suspended custodial sentence with supervision and a structured programme intended to address the circumstances connected with the offending.

The precise nature of the 26-day programme was not detailed in the published report. No additional explanation was provided about its location, timetable or specific objectives.

What did the defendant admit in court?

Adams-Entwistle admitted possessing a bladed article in a public place. The object was described as a multitool with an axe on the end.

The report did not identify the manufacturer, model, size or weight of the multitool. It also did not state whether the axe-ended tool had been used, displayed or connected to any threatening behaviour.

The available court report records the possession offence and the location where the item was found. It does not report any allegation that Adams-Entwistle used the tool against another person or caused injury.

This distinction is important because the sentence reported by the court was for possession of the article in a public place. The published details do not describe an assault, threat or other offence involving the use of the tool.

When was the tool discovered?

The item was discovered on November 3, 2025, at Manchester Airport’s transport interchange.

The transport interchange is separate from the aircraft cabin and is used by people arriving at or leaving the airport by public transport, taxis and other vehicles. The report did not provide further details about the circumstances of the stop, including which officers or staff discovered the item or whether Adams-Entwistle was preparing to enter a terminal.

It also did not state whether the tool had been packed in luggage, carried on his person or found in another part of the interchange.

The court report only confirms that the multitool was in his possession at the airport location and that he later pleaded guilty to possessing a bladed article in a public place.

What was the second offence?

Adams-Entwistle also admitted failing to surrender to Manchester Magistrates’ Court on February 17, 2026.

The report stated that he had previously been released on bail from Bury Police Station on November 3, 2025, the same date on which the airport offence took place.

A failure to surrender allegation concerns a defendant not attending court as required after being released on bail. In this case, the court imposed no separate penalty for that offence.

The published report did not state why Adams-Entwistle failed to attend, whether the hearing was rearranged or how long it took for the matter to return before the court.

What did the court order for the multitool?

Manchester Magistrates’ Court ordered the multitool to be forfeited and destroyed.

The order means Adams-Entwistle will not have the tool returned to him. It is to be taken out of his possession and disposed of rather than retained or sold.

The court also ordered him to pay £85 in prosecution costs. The report did not state whether any victim surcharge or other financial order was imposed.

The destruction order applied to the multitool described in the case as having an axe on the end. The available report does not identify any other items seized during the investigation.

How long is the suspended sentence?

The custodial sentence is four months, suspended for 18 months.

The 18-month period is the time during which the suspended sentence remains subject to enforcement if the defendant breaches the relevant conditions or commits a further offence. The court also required Adams-Entwistle to complete a 26-day programme and follow instructions from a responsible officer.

The report did not specify whether the programme must be completed within a particular number of weeks or months. It also did not publish the detailed terms of the supervision arrangement.

The court listing said the offences were considered serious enough to justify a prison sentence. However, because the term was suspended, Adams-Entwistle was not required to serve the four months immediately under the sentence reported by The Oldham Times.

What is known about the defendant?

The report identified the defendant as Leon Adams-Entwistle, aged 28, of Elizabeth Avenue, Chadderton.

It did not provide information about his occupation, family circumstances, previous convictions or the reason he was at Manchester Airport when the tool was found.

No statement from Adams-Entwistle, his legal representative, the police or the Crown Prosecution Service was included in the available report. The article also did not identify the prosecutor, defence solicitor or sentencing magistrates.

The facts in this account are therefore limited to the details reported from Manchester Magistrates’ Court: the defendant’s identity, the location and date of the possession offence, the description of the tool, the guilty pleas, the sentence, the programme requirement, the forfeiture order, the prosecution costs and the separate failure-to-surrender offence.

What does the case show about airport security?

The case highlights that an axe-ended multitool can result in criminal proceedings when it is possessed in a public place such as an airport transport interchange.

The report does not say whether Adams-Entwistle was stopped during a routine security check, following an alert or as part of another police inquiry. It also does not state whether the item was intended for work, travel or another purpose.

Passengers and visitors should not assume that a tool is permitted simply because it has more than one function. The legal position can depend on the type of blade or tool, the place where it is carried and whether the person has a lawful reason for possessing it.

For this case, the court’s finding was based on possession of a bladed article in a public place. The published report does not provide a fuller legal analysis of whether the defendant claimed a legitimate reason for carrying the multitool.

Background to the development

The Manchester Airport multitool case followed an incident on November 3, 2025, when Adams-Entwistle was found with a multitool featuring an axe at the airport transport interchange.

He was later required to appear before Manchester Magistrates’ Court and admitted the possession offence. He also admitted failing to surrender to the court on February 17, 2026, after being released on bail from Bury Police Station.

At sentencing on September 14, 2026, the court imposed a four-month custodial term suspended for 18 months. It also ordered Adams-Entwistle to complete a 26-day programme, follow the instructions of a responsible officer, surrender the multitool for destruction and pay £85 in prosecution costs.

The court imposed no separate penalty for the failure-to-surrender offence. The published report stated that the seriousness of the offences justified a custodial term, although the sentence was suspended rather than activated immediately.

How could this affect airport passengers?

The development may encourage passengers to check the contents of bags and pockets before travelling through Manchester Airport, particularly when carrying tools intended for work, repairs or outdoor activities.

The case does not establish that every multitool is automatically prohibited in every travel situation. It does show that an axe-ended tool can lead to a criminal charge when carried in a public place and that the court may regard the offence as serious enough to justify custody.

Travellers who need to transport tools should check the latest airport and airline rules before arriving. They should also consider whether the item should be placed in checked baggage, declared in advance or left at home. Where there is uncertainty, passengers should seek guidance from the airport, airline or relevant authorities rather than rely on assumptions.

For Adams-Entwistle, the immediate outcome was a suspended four-month sentence, supervision-related requirements, destruction of the tool and prosecution costs. For other airport users, the case underlines the importance of checking bags carefully and avoiding the unplanned carriage of bladed or axe-ended equipment.