We have previously followed the perils of the press (here), but this videotape shows how reporters can be attacked for simply walking around with a cameraman. Paresh Patel was attacked by drunken thugs in Manchester. What is astonishing is that neither John Nugent, 22, nor David Neville McKenna, 27, will spend time in jail for the unprovoked attack.
Fortunately, Patel is a black belt in karate. I am completely baffled by the response of the court to the attack on a member of the media in the course of covering a story.
Nugent and McKenna confessed to charges of affray and common assault. Since the crime of “affray” is a bit novel for American lawyers, here is the provision under section 3 of the Public Order Act 1986:
1. A person is guilty of affray if he uses or threatens unlawful violence towards another and the person’s conduct is such as would cause a person of reasonable firmness present at the scene to fear for his personal safety.
2. Where two or more persons use or threaten the unlawful violence, it is the conduct of them taken together that must be considered for the purpose of subsection (1)
3. For the purposes of this section a threat cannot be made by the use of words alone.
4. No person of reasonable firmness need actually be, or be likely to be, present at the scene.
5. Affray may be committed in private as well as in public places.
You can be put away for three years for affray and Judge David Hernandez denounced the men as “drunken louts” but then spared them any jail.
Hernandez added: “He defended himself, he delivered a blow. I say good for Mr Patel. He had no reason to be subjected to that level of abuse and threat by you.” Well Pip Pip, Mr. Patel, and its probation for the people who attacked you.
Also sentenced was Jodie Anderson, 26, who was handed a six-week suspended sentence and 12-month supervision order. She threw a pint at Patel, who was simply trying to do a story on gay computer pioneer Alan Turing — recently given a posthumous apology by Gordon Brown.
McKenna received 18-month community and supervision order, an alcohol education programme and 140 hours’ unpaid work for common assault, affray and vandalism.
Nugent was so drunk after a funeral that he could not remember anything. When he attacked Patel he was out on a theft charge, but he was still given only an intensive alternative-to-custody order for 18 months plus supervision, ordered to attend an anger-management programme and given unpaid work for 80 hours.
The question is who is “affray” of justice when you can attack a reporter on video and just get probation?
The dangers of such thugs are well known to reporters who attract crowds the minute a camera light goes on. This was the case a couple years ago in Australia:
For the English story, click here.
Tom.
Your second paragraph is very accurate regarding the situation here. There seems to be an attitude here towards alcohol abuse that is not shared by the rest of Europe and many other parts of the world.
The really sad thing about this incident is that Patel probably thinks himself lucky not to have been arrested for assault himself.
The fact that the cameraman could stand right there with the hooligans and not be harassed makes me think that the situation was motivated by racism. Perhaps it’s too bad that the police arrived when they did – it seemed like Mr. Patel had reached his limit and was seconds away from “causing his attacker to cease to be a threat.” That would have also make the suspect more “compliant” once the police did arrive… It’s interesting that the cops just chucked the guy in the back of the van without cuffing him.
My sense is that in the UK, there is so much of this “low-level” fighting that such an attack is fairly commonplace, and the criminal justice may be overwhelmed and “desensitized” to it. If you’re interested in a really messy can of worms, look into the ASBO (Anti-Social Behavour Orders), a civil process (with low standards of proof and little hope for appeal) that can lead to up to 5 years imprisonment which is typically applied to pre-teens and teenagers for incidents of vandalism, intimidation and general loutishness. It’s led to all sorts of messes like a teenager who was ordered not to congregate with 3 or more other teens, but was arrested because he attended a talk for teens on how to avoid anti-social behavior.
Glad to see that cameraman was a lot of help. “Here, I’ll carry your bag and watch two guys attack you.”
I wouldn’t be surprised if this was racially motivated; that was the first thing that came to mind when I saw the name Patel. The lack of jail time for this sort of crime makes me wonder how violent it would have to be to constitute assault.
Good call, lottakatz. We think that Lou Dobbs and his ilk are nutters about US immigration; the UK is actually much worse right now. If Brits are upset enough about the influx of “Pakis” to start following Nick Griffin and the British Nazi, er, I mean, “National” Party, they wouldn’t think twice about getting pissed (British usage, not American) and beating the next swarthy individual they came across.
I’m just glad Mr. Patel was equipped to defend himself and turn the beat-down around on Mssrs. Nugent and McKenna.
” 1. A person is guilty of affray if he uses or threatens unlawful violence towards another and the person’s conduct is such as would cause a person of reasonable firmness present at the scene to fear for his personal safety.
4. No person of reasonable firmness need actually be, or be likely to be, present at the scene.
5. Affray may be committed in private as well as in public places. ”
******************
Seems like Nancy Grace, Rush Limbaugh and other would be incarcerated under this law.
I am afraid for my own well being of this law….I understand the need and reason in today’s society in relations to Videos, web Cams, Facebook etc. What about people that are under surveillance by law enforcement and no charges are issued?
Would this law not speak of over breadth and or over reaching could it be constitutionally vague here in the US?
FYI, RWR had spoken to PM Thatcher to make the UK part of the US? Damn scary to me too.
There may be more to this story. Britain has been plagued with a steady increase anti-immigration hostility and racially motivated violence in the last several years. It is a big problem. That Mr. Patel is a reporter may be incidental to the actual cause of the attack. That there is so little punishment may speak to the magnitude of the problem, the insensitivity of one judge or magistrate or a glimpse of a deeper political agenda.
Perhaps it has gotten to the point where only corporations are “persons” there in the queen’s land.
At least we know why Fox snooze isn’t working its trade over there.