How I got arrested for being a pedestrian.
Well, buckle up kids for a tale that will show you just how god awful the police can be in this country.
This all begins with a road. An ordinary road. It appears on the first Ordnance Survey Map of Norwich. It has been pedestrianised for 2 years. It is a narrow urban canyon, should never have been open to motor traffic, and would be far more pleasant without it. Unfortunately, any attempt to enjoy this new pedestrian space is spoiled by impatient arses who decide that their desire to rat run in their cars outweighs basic niceties like “obeying the law”. After being run off the road a few too many times by these people, folks in the more radical of Norwich’s cycling groups (that is to say, not very radical) begin to discuss what should be done. Reporting the crimes to the police goes nowhere. Asking the council for enforcement cameras goes nowhere. So people begin to talk about protest actions.
At this point I should introduce the concept of “Human Bollards”. That is where pedestrians quite literally act as a bollard to block vehicular crimes. This is done in Oxford by the Oxford Pedestrians Association, and famously in London by “Cycling Mikey” — simply google “Gandalf Corner” to learn more.
So on the 15th of October I was doing some shopping in Norwich. Bought some boxes in Wilco, some Bread from the Market, and a coffee from the little tricycle coffee van.
Walking back down through the market, I stepped onto exchange street. I paused to drink a coffee. I was stood in the middle of a pedestrianised street, right next to a “no motor vehicles” sign. Surely, by any sensible measure I had a right to stand here.
A car approached. A black BMW. It drove up to me. I simply didn’t move. I did take out my phone in case the driver tried anything illegal. Naively at this point I assumed the side of the law was on pedestrians in a pedestrian zone, not criminal drivers ignoring basic road signs. I also assumed the fact that she was being filmed would prevent the driver later giving an account to the police that was…shall we say….not strictly in accordance with the facts as they could very easily be demonstrated to be.
She stops and gets out the car and asks me what I am doing. I point at the very large sign right next to me and point out that this road is a pedestrianised area. Rather than doing the sensible thing and turning her car around, she choses to get back in her car and drive right up until she is 12 inches away from me. I am not sure what she expected. Being a stubborn arse, I don’t back down.
By this point some people had gathered. Some started berating me, demanding to know whilst I was stood in the road. Other, much nicer, more sensible, and generally more well rounded human beings came and stood next to me in solidarity.
Out of the berating crowd, one ruffian tried to shove me out of the road — a very clear case of assault. Unfortunately at this point I did swear at this very ungentle gentleman. At no other point however did I lose my temper, despite some shouting at the driver to drive at me, and another person threatening to “knock me the spark out”. Even though this assault was clearly captured on CCTV, that the interviewing officers had watched, I would be accused of making this up in my police interview. After about 10 minutes of standing in the road, and it being clear that the driver is going to keep on trying to force her way through pedestrians, I gave up.
Instead I just opted for just stopping cars for a moment, informing them I was recording and that the road had been closed for some 2 years, and then moving out the way, intending to pass this to the police as evidence that “something must be done”. How foolish. Won’t be doing that again. Norfolk Constabulary are very fast to move on a homeless person. A dangerous driver? Nah.
Please bear in mind this lasts only 10 minutes. A measly 10 minutes in which poor innocent hard done by drivers are unable to illegally use a pedestrian street as a rat run. Unacceptable! That works out as about 1 hour in custody for each minute of disruption.
By this point some arguments had broken out between people supporting me, and, frankly, thugs opposing me. One had started threatening to punch someone for pointing out that the sign meant no entry. So I called the police. Someone else apparently already had, as they arrived moments later. I informed the first constable on the scene what had happened, including pointing out the individual that had threatened to assault numerous people. Another mistake. This merely identified me to the constable. Never assume the police are interested in the law. You know. The thing their oath of office says they should be.
Instead of doing anything about the people who were actually threatening violence, or the cars still ignoring the road signs, he opted to “detain me” with handcuffs. I asked if I was under arrest. He said no. So I asked him what power he was detaining me under. He refused to tell me, then said “are you going to let me do my job or give me a law lecture”. Clearly this individual is the type that needs surgically removing from police if we are going to have any chance of the police being a useful service — police simply do not have a generic power of detention and as such the use of handcuffs to detain was illegal. So I again asked him “under what power are you detaining me”. This is what groups such as Liberty tell you to do in such a situation.
He then lost his temper, and shouted “enjoy custody”. Again, for simply asking what legal power he was using. Disgraceful. (This btw is not actually surprising if you’ve listened to any black person ever about how the UK police conduct themselves. This constable gave me extremely strong vibe of someone I worked with who later joined the Metropolitan Police, before some years later being expelled from the force because he attacked a suspect with a knife).
Back to the story. After talking to a bunch of people, and apparently threatening to arrest someone for telling him that the road was indeed closed to cars, I was arrested for Obstructing a Highway, “Threatening behaviour” and assault, and then taken away to Wymondham police centre. Note, none of the 3 constables present did a single thing about the law breaking drivers. I was literally held in handcuffs at the side of the road as the cars were waved through.
Someone took photos of this arrest and sent them to some friends of mine. Friends, who I note, did not form a militia to break me out of Wymondham Police station.
At the station we went through the checking in process. This was interesting in itself. Unlike the power mad arresting officer, these people were somewhat polite. My possessions were searched and confiscated. The sergeant offered to put my bread in a fridge (philistine). I was asked my height. I was then asked my height in imperial. Confusingly, when you are checked in, you are stood next to a wall chart — in metric. But the system demands imperial. Yay Britain.
Then fingerprints and DNA taken (hopefully soon to be deleted) and taken to a cell, and given some books to read.
I notice that the cell has the crime stoppers phone number painted on the ceiling. This is very useful. I could call it and tell them about the police failing to deal with extremely unlawful driving. If, however, mobile phones were not confiscated at check in. Seriously, its not like its a simple number. Its a standard random 0800 number. No one will remember it from being on the cell roof.
You may think that it wouldn’t take terribly long for someone to engage about 3 braincells and realise that asking someone not to commit a crime is not obstructing a highway, as the full crime is “obstructing a highway without lawful excuse”. Asking people to obey the law is, by very clear definition, a lawful excuse. Also, according to the Police Statements, they had in under an hour watched the CCTV and seen no assault had taken place, and that I had not threatened a single person.
But no, I spent 9 hours in custody all told. Given some truly terrible books to read. One was so bad I literally could not read it. The other contained a graphic scene of sexual violence, so was returned to the custody officers with the suggestion it was probably not best to have in their library, in case they ended up with an abused person in their custody.
Lunch. And tea. Vegan Milk is not a thing in custody. Lunch was some abysmal vegan noodles. A vegetarian who is lactose intolerant is not going to eat well in custody. But better than some reports I have heard. At least it was more than an apple.
Then eventually an interview. Nothing presented in this interview gave any reason for 9 hours of detention or why it had to wait until I was exhausted and stressed by early evening.
A custody sergeant led me through to the locked door leading to the check in area. And then followed an awkward 10 minutes as he alternated between insisting he was sure it was the right code for the door, and embarrassed hammering on the door to try and get attention of someone, anyone, to let him out of the cell block. I don’t think he enjoyed that evening.
First I had a brief meeting with the duty solicitor, who seemed confused as to how the hell this amounted to obstruction or threatening behavior. I learned later that my wife had contacted another solicitors firm (the one that would eventually represent me) who had told her she must have the facts wrong, as no one could plausibly be arrested for obstructing a highway by standing on a pedestrianised street. Oh sweet naivety.
Then followed a highly frustrating inteview process. They tell me they have me on CCTV, which means they know I was assaulted. But insist no statement says I was assualted and demand to know if I am calling their witnesses liars.
They spend a lot of time trying to effectively argue that black is white and get me to admit that a pedestrian has a duty to get out of the way of cars on pavements. Embarrassing really. They ask me if I think just anyone should try and uphold the law. An odd question for a police force founded on the Peelian principles (Peelian Principle Number 7: the police are the public and that the public are the police, the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.).
Even without that principle, the question is easily answered as literally a week before this I stepped in to prevent ongoing street harassment, conduct I don’t think anyone could question. (Street harassers will hurl abuse at trans women but become sniveling little cowards when faced with someone their own size firmly informing them they will not take another step until their victim is out of sight.).
They spent ages trying to persuade me that it was threatening behaviour to refuse to move out of a road. This again, is a nonsense. There was a pedestrian shouting for the driver to just drive at me and “I would move”, and the driver responded by driving towards me. In a battle of “what is more threatening”, “standing still and pointing at a sign” is very clearly less threatening than driving a car at someone!
Despite the fact that the police had CCTV of her literally driving at me, they apparently did not charge her with either ignoring road-signs or threatening behaviour. People talk about carbrain — the state of brain in which the rights and privileges of a car driver are upheld above all else. Attempt to ask the police to enforce the law without fear and favour, and they will not. Crimes committed by a driver are secondary, will often get a warning letter, or offered a course at your convenience. Try and prevent a driver from committing an actual crime and you get 9 hours in custody.
The Police immediately abandoned their attempt to charge me with assault or deliberately intimidating people, and instead opt for a S.5 Public Order offence and obstructing a Highway.
After being charged with these offences I was then eventually released, without a coat, at 10pm on a freezing night 15 miles away from my home, with a bus ticket. A definite problem with the police locating their only holding cells in a town well away from Norwich. It took me over 2 hours to get home.
Despite the dearth of evidence, they rush out a press release about me being charged with “Threatening behaviour”. I have to phone my boss, who is riddled with Covid fever, quarantined in a Hotel during a work trip from hell, to break this news. Excellent. Anyone else really looking forward to their annual performance review this year? Oh and did I mention that at this point I had only 6 months left on my employment contract and needed it renewed? Yeah…police rushing out their naming and shaming press releases the day after an arrest is definitely….something.
The first court date was set for December. They disclose some evidence and their case summary the day before.
This consists of 3 witness statements, and some Body Worn Video footage. They opt not to disclose CCTV of the event, stating that it does not undermine their case. Interesting comment that.
Apart from the police officer’s statement, in which he claims that being asked under what power he has placed someone in handcuffs is argumentative, we have 3 statements. The BMW driver who claims to have been more terrified than any other time in her life, a passer-by, and a child who claimed to have been twice assaulted by me. Just in case reading this leads to you suspect that I am a bad person, I would like to point out that these statements do not excactly, how shall I put this….correspond with the facts.
The description of the CCTV mentioned above states that “ Defendent does not appear to assualt witness (redacted)”. Right….so it shows someone you intend to rely on in court has lied to you, but doesn’t undermine your case? Interesting thought process there Crown Prosecution Service. Also this witness is a minor — are you asking a child to commit perjury?
The case summary makes no mention of the pedestrianisation of the road.
Right.
First hearing. Infront of some very polite magistrates, I enter a plea of not guilty. My solicitor presents my outline case. The magistrate is confused. He asks the CPS to work out the status of the road, and pointedly says that half their case goes away if it is pedestrianised. Interesting.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, the Obstructing a Highway Charge is dropped by the end of December. This is the first big relief. As part of their war on protest, our fine and majestic government has deemed obstructing a highway as worthy of prison.
So another review with the solicitor. If the witness statements were accepted by the court, they would convict. Doesn’t look brilliant. So we ask for the CCTV. Months pass. We are now 2 weeks out from the trial when the CCTV emerges. We watch it. It trashes the case on all but one aspect. The two key witnesses are very clearly lying. The driver isn’t scared, she gets out her car and chats with people. She knows she is breaking the law. People have told her. She tries to intimidate other pedestrians with her car. And the child I violently assaulted twice? Absolutely clear that never happened. The only part of their case that could possibly remain is that a swore when someone assaulted me.
The police were fairly selective in what they initially disclosed concerning that moment, choosing to disclose only a mobile phone recording where the swearing could be heard, but the assault was off camera. With a proper camera angle you see someone literally hurl themselves at me. Again, interesting this doesn’t make their case summary.
Which is still risky for me — the only plausible defence is to argue that it is a reasonable reaction to being assaulted under s.5(3) of the Public Order Act. One would hope the magistrates would see sense. But it would still be an uncomfortable trial, because technically shouting “F*** Off” at someone who has attacked you in public is all the components of s.5 offence.
Fortunately, before we have to make that decision and case, the CPS dump the entire thing. They keep their reasons secret. But it’s a hell of a coincidence that within a week of finally having to disclose the clearest video footage of events, they drop the case like a hot potato.
The lessons?
The main one is that the Police in Norfolk are very very bad at their jobs, and are holding onto officers that are incompetent border-lining on malicious. By 9pm on the day of my arrest they knew that two of the statements they would seek to rely on clearly could not stand up and were directly contracited by video evidence. During interview they insinuated I was making up having been assaulted, despite having watched that assault on video. They selectively chose not to disclose evidence that their own summary said showed their witness statements as inaccurate, and labelled this as of no use to the defence. They deliberately made me out to be a violent thug in the media, despite having watched CCTV that showed that not only did I not threaten anyone, I was in fact a victim of assault.
If you’re going to protest in this country, be aware the police don’t really give a damn about your right to do so, and are fully prepared to make up absurd charges to interfere with it.
And remember, I am a moderately wealthy white man with a law degree, access to good quality private solicitors (there is effectively no legal aid for magistrates court — if you don’t have a few thousand in upfront cash, you’re representing yourself), and a boss who was very sympathetic. I am more certain than ever that there are people without these resources routinely wrongly convicted in this country, or who plead guilty out of fear of the system they do not have the resources to fight.
EDIT: The original version of this story put my arrest date as the 18th. This was in fact the 15th of October. I do trust this has not caused unnecessary distress or confusion to the reader.
