The incident unfolded on Bank Plain in Norwich city centre at around 15:30 BST on a Thursday in September, when Norfolk Police received reports of a suspicious object under a vehicle. Officers quickly cordoned off the area, closing nearby roads and evacuating buildings as a precaution while the item was assessed.
Emergency services, including fire and ambulance crews, attended the scene. An Explosive Ordnance Disposal team was called in to examine the device. After recovery and specialist review, the object was confirmed not to be explosive. It was later identified as a tracking device.
Norfolk Police was called to Bank Plain, in Norwich, at about 15:30 BST on Thursday
The car belonged to Norwich businessman Besnik Ademja. He said he was leaving a business meeting when a passer-by alerted him to the object.
“I was in a business meeting with an ex-colleague of mine and as I was approaching the car a lady said, ‘you have had something put under your car’,” he said.
At first, he believed it was simply debris. But the situation escalated rapidly once emergency services arrived and the cordon was put in place.
“I was scared and shocked and I did not know how to act,” he added. “I do not feel safe anymore. It feels life-threatening for me.”
Following confirmation that the object was a tracker, police launched a stalking investigation. Three men were arrested in connection with the case, including a third man detained in January. Two of the suspects were in their 50s and one was in his 30s. All were questioned.
In the UK, individuals are arrested where there is reasonable suspicion, and if sufficient evidence exists, they may then be formally charged. In this case, no charges were issued. The three men have now been notified that no further action will be taken.
Careledger has gathered that the case will not proceed to court.
The development shifts attention to what evidence was available and whether it met the threshold required for prosecution. Establishing who placed the device, its purpose, and whether it constituted stalking under the law would have been central to any charging decision.
The scale of the initial response reflected the seriousness with which authorities treated the discovery. A city centre evacuation and bomb disposal deployment indicate that officers were acting on genuine safety concerns at the time. Yet the absence of prosecution suggests that, after further review, the evidential position may not have supported a court case.
Norfolk Police has not publicly detailed the reasoning behind the decision. It remains unclear whether the investigation has been formally closed.
What began as a major security incident in Norwich has concluded without prosecution, leaving unanswered questions about how the tracking device came to be under the vehicle and why the case did not advance to trial.
