POLICE have admitted mistakes after a man was found guilty of trying to smuggle a pipe bomb on to an aircraft at Manchester Airport.

Nadeem Muhammad, 43, from Bury, sobbed in the dock at Manchester Crown Court after the jury convicted him of possessing explosives with intent to endanger life or property.

Security staff at the airport discovered the bomb hidden in his hand luggage.

There have now been calls for an inquiry after police initially failed to detect the device was “potentially viable” and he was allowed to board another plane days later.

Greater Manchester Police has admitted errors were made and has already reviewed its practices.

The court heard Muhammad, of Tinline Street, was planning to board a Ryanair flight to Italy on January 30 when security officers uncovered the device, made of masking tape, batteries, the tube of a marker pen, pins and wires, in the zip lining of his small green suitcase.

Muhammad claimed that he had never seen the device before and that it had nothing to do with him. But the jury did not believe him and reached a majority verdict of 10 to two on the charge following 15 hours and 45 minutes of deliberations.

Nadeem Muhammad, who had pipe bomb in hand luggage at Manchester Airport, guilty of explosives offence

During the trial it was revealed that security officers at the airport had not initially believed the bomb was viable and, after being questioned by counter terrorism police when the device was discovered, Muhammad was released and allowed to board another flight to Bergamo, near Milan, five days later.

The jury was told that Muhammad, who was born in Pakistan but had an Italian passport, was planning to detonate the bomb once on board the Boeing 737.

The “crude improvised explosive device” was discovered by airport security when his hand luggage went through scanners at the airport.

But when airport security swabbed the bomb, there was no trace of explosives on the outside and officers did not believe it was a viable device.

It was initially kept in the pocket of Deborah Jeffrey, the security manager at Terminal Three, before being handed to police.

Muhammad was questioned by officers from the counter terrorism unit but released.

He returned to the airport the following day to collect his mobile phone, which had been taken by police, and then again on February 5 when he boarded another flight to Italy.

It was only on February 8 when the device was examined by forensics officers that suspicions were raised and the bomb squad was called.

The explosive was then sent for examination by expert Lorna Philp, who found it was a “crude but potentially viable improvised explosive device”.

The device contained double base smokeless propellant, normally found in firearms ammunition, which was made up of nitroglycerin and nitrocellulose.

Italian police raided Muhammad’s home and workplace on February 9 and took him to a police station.

But he was released again after a couple of hours and on February 12 boarded another flight back to the UK.

He was arrested when he arrived back at Manchester Airport.

Muhammad had told the trial he was surprised to see the bomb when it was found in his bag and it had nothing to do with him.

He told the court: “I had never seen it before.”

Muhammad, whose wife was in court throughout the trial, cried loudly as he was remanded in custody by Judge Patrick Field QC.

He is due to be sentenced on August 23.

Following the verdict, Sue Hemming, head of the special crime and counter terrorism division in the Crown Prosecution Service, said: “Despite extensive investigation, Nadeem Muhammad’s motive for attempting to take this device onto a plane remains unknown.

“However it is clear that the consequences, had he been successful, could have been disastrous.”

After the trial, Supt Graeme Openshaw of GMP’s specialist operations said: “We accept that there were some errors with our assessment of the device on the day and we have already reviewed our practices, however this incident has demonstrated the effectiveness of the airport security checks where the item was successfully detected and the passenger intercepted.

“The device itself was small and had less than 10 grams of gunpowder inside and it is not clear what it could have done.

“Immediately following the incident, we have reviewed the way we respond to suspicious items found during the security process and a number of changes have been made.

“The enhanced protocols have been successfully tested on a number of occasions in the last few months.”