Our North West Regional Organiser, Mike Whitby, was recently arrested after a discussion with an African Traffic Warden, in England, who was angrily mumbling at him in a mixture of an obscure language mixed with English.
The full story appeared here http://www.bnp.org.uk/news/national/%E2%80%9Ccan-you-speak-english-please%E2%80%9D.
Following this Mike has written this letter to the Crown Prosecution Service in the hope of some answers.
I need your help and clarification, as I am involved in a case of;
‘Using threatening / abusive / insulting words / behaviour to cause harassment / alarm / distress.’
‘Racially / religiously aggravated harassment / alarm / distress by words / writing.’
I have been researching your website and the relevant details of these statutory regulations.
This has left me in some considerable confusion, because, although this Act appears to protect people like me, the law seldom recognises this fact.
Please look down this list of notes, taken from your website, followed by some questions below. I would appreciate your comments as to why our group is NOT protected by the law, and why we are always presumed to be guilty by the CPS and Police.
Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) website details.
Impact of racist and religious crimes on individuals and communities
‘….We have published our policy statement and guidance because we want victims and their families, as well as the general public, to be confident that the CPS understands the serious nature of this type of crime and the real and lasting effects it has on individuals, communities and the whole of society.
By letting people know what they can expect from us when we prosecute racist or religious crime, we aim to improve confidence in the criminal justice system….
‘…Publishing a policy statement and guidance also helps to raise awareness of the relevant issues for prosecutors to assist them when making decisions about prosecuting racist or religious crime….
‘…We have consulted people from black and minority ethnic communities and faith communities and taken their comments into account in writing our policy and guidance. By doing this, we have gained a better understanding of the things that are important to them and what we need to know about….
‘…Racist and religious crime is particularly hurtful to victims as they are being targeted solely because of their personal identity, their actual or perceived racial or ethnic origin or their actual or perceived belief or faith.
Black and minority ethnic victims can also be targeted because they belong to other minority groups and may experience multiple discrimination….
‘…These crimes can happen randomly, for example, at nightclubs, at takeaways or restaurants, on public transport, at football matches, or on shopping trips, or can be a part of a campaign of continued harassment and victimisation by, for example neighbours, extremist groups, customers or even family members.
Crimes can sometimes be a combination of these things - harassment by neighbours or attacks by organised gangs on a person and their home or random attacks in public places. Activity by extremist groups in an area may also manifest itself on the terraces at football matches….
‘…The impact on victims is different for each individual, but there are common problems that are experienced by victims of racist of religiously aggravated crime.
They can feel extremely isolated or fearful of going out or even staying at home. They may become withdrawn, and suspicious of organisations or strangers.
Their mental and physical health may suffer in a variety of ways. For young people in particular, the impact can be damaging to their self-esteem or identity and, without support, a form of self-hatred of their racial or religious identity may result….
‘…The confusion, fear and lack of safety felt by individuals have a ripple effect in the wider community of their racial or religious group. Communities can feel victimised and vulnerable to further attack….’
CPS information – ‘…Crime and Disorder Act 1998 (as amended)…’
‘…This Act came into force on 30 September 1998 and created a number of specific offences of racially aggravated crime, based on offences of wounding, assault, damage, harassment and threatening/abusive behaviour. Monitoring had indicated that these types of crime were those most commonly experienced by victims of racial violence or harassment….
‘…The Act was amended by the Anti-terrorism Crime and Security Act 2001, which came into effect on 14 December 2001. It extended the scope of the Crime and Disorder Act by creating new specific religiously aggravated offences and applying the same sentencing duty to all other offences where there is evidence of religious aggravation….
‘…The legislation provides definitions of racial groups and religious groups in the following terms:
‘…A racial group means a group of persons defined by reference to race, colour, nationality (including citizenship) or ethnic or national origins. The definition is wide and victims may come within the definition under more than one of the references. Gypsies and some travellers, refugees or asylum seekers or others from less visible minorities would be included within this definition. There has been a legal ruling that Jews and Sikhs are included in the definition of a racial group [Mandla v. Dowell-Lee  2 AC 548]….
‘…A religious group means a group of persons defined by reference to religious belief or lack of religious belief. This includes Muslims, Hindus and Christians, and different sects within a religion. It also includes people who do not hold any religious beliefs at all….
‘…To prove that an offence is racially or religiously aggravated, the prosecution has to prove the "basic" offence followed by racial or religious aggravation, as defined in section 28 Crime and Disorder Act 1998. An offence will be racially or religiously aggravated if:
1. At the time of the offence (or shortly before or after), the offender demonstrates to the victim hostility based on the victim's membership (or presumed membership) of a racial or religious group, or
2. The offence is motivated wholly or partly by hostility towards members of a racial or religious group based on their membership (or presumed membership) of that group.
a)Demonstrating hostility is not defined by the Act. The ordinary dictionary definition of hostile includes simply being "unfriendly". Proving this limb of the offence requires evidence of words or actions which show hostility toward the victim.
However, this hostility may be totally unconnected with the "basic" offence which may have been committed for other, non-racially or religiously motivated reasons.
For example, an assault which takes place because of an argument over a parking place, but where the offender then utters racial abuse to the victim of the assault would come within the scope of this part of section 28.
b) Motivated by hostility may prove more difficult in practice. In the absence of a clear statement by the accused that his/her actions were motivated by his hostility to his victim based on his race or religious belief, for example, an admission under caution, how can motive be shown?
In some cases, background evidence could well be important if relevant to establish motive, for example, evidence of membership of, or association with, a racist group, or evidence of expressed racist views in the past might, depending on the facts, be admissible in evidence…….’
The details of my confusion are as follows;
My ethnic group / type is; Patriotic Indigenous English / Male / Christian / Truth-Seeker / Whistle-Blower.
This often results in me and people like me, being treated in extremely ‘Hostile’ ways; we are often threatened, abused, both verbally and physically and spat at; our culture, nationality, race and beliefs are often besmirched; we have insulting words shouted at us, and signs painted on our homes, and placards held up, displaying hatred towards us, our Christian religion and our beliefs.
As a result of this common occurrence and the injustice of no action being taken to defend our rights, we suffer a great deal of alarm and distress.
These are NOT ‘Perceived’ crimes, they are actual. But, whenever we report these crimes to the authorities, we are ignored, even when there is clear corroborating evidence to prove, beyond any doubt, that the crimes have taken place, the Police are never interested in doing anything about it.
Q: Is there meant to be a double standard within Hate Crimes? It certainly appears as though there is.
Nowadays, I and people like me are regarded by members of the establishment as ‘White’ or ‘Caucasian’. I object to both of these terms, because; the colour of my skin is NOT the same as this paper I am typing on and I am NOT from the Caucasus, of Southern Russia.
Also I resent the racial implication that people like me can be regarded as Caucasian, or White, due to someone else’s description of us and our appearance, but other groups cannot be classified, unless they do so themselves.
For the first 20 to 30 years of my life, no definition was ever required for my ‘racial type’, because this was simply ‘English’. But, now that our borders have been opened for people from all over the world to enter, the native English people are now expected to accept this unfair categorisation. Does the CPS regard this as being fair and reasonable?
Is it the view of the CPS that Race Hate Crimes can ONLY be perpetrated by members of the indigenous population of England / Britain? This is the way it appears to me, and MY ‘Perception’ is every bit as valid as someone else’s, isn’t it?
In paragraph 5, of your website notes, above, you use the term; ‘extremist groups’, several times, but you don’t specify what you mean by this. Could you enlighten me on this point, please?
Is this description based upon the (perhaps biased) views of those who never disagree with the government, however despotic it is, or whatever crimes it inflicts upon the indigenous population, or other innocent people in foreign countries? Or does it refer to people, or groups of people, who have actually been convicted of so-called, “Racist” crimes?
In order for people to be absolutely certain that they are not likely to fall foul of the law, it is very important that these points are clarified.
I am further intrigued by paragraph 5, where you quote;
‘…harassment by neighbours or attacks by organised gangs on a person and their home or random attacks in public places. Activity by extremist groups…’
Is it the view of the CPS that this sort of crime is perpetrated by patriotic members of the indigenous population? If so, could you please quote some instances of this, as I am not aware of ANY?
However, I AM aware of many incidents where members of the indigenous population have been hounded out of their homes, with threats of violence and excrement put through their letter boxes; and some have even been fire-bombed out of their homes; and have been racially abused, assaulted, brutalised, raped and in some cases murdered, by members of other ‘races’.
Yet prosecutions very rarely take place.
Two very good examples of this are; Charlene Downes and Gavin Hopley, who were both murdered, allegedly, by people from other races, yet nobody has been convicted and the will to pursue these cases is not evident.
When these types of crimes take place every member of the community suffers;
To quote the CPS’ notes from above;
‘…Impact of racist and religious crimes on individuals and communities;
‘…They can feel extremely isolated or fearful of going out or even staying at home. They may become withdrawn, and suspicious of organisations or strangers. Their mental and physical health may suffer in a variety of ways.
For young people in particular, the impact can be damaging to their self-esteem or identity and, without support, a form of self-hatred of their racial or religious identity may result…
‘The confusion, fear and lack of safety felt by individuals have a ripple effect in the wider community of their racial or religious group. Communities can feel victimised and vulnerable to further attack…’
I find it incredible that the CPS does not see that Racism Cuts Both Ways. Does it concern you that large numbers of the indigenous population of this country live in fear for their safety and their total existence, yet the CPS and Police will NOT do anything to address this massive problem?
In your description of ‘Hostility’, you state;
‘…The ordinary dictionary definition of “hostile” includes simply being "unfriendly"… ‘…background evidence could well be important if relevant to establish motive, for example, evidence of membership of, or association with, a racist group…’
Does this mean that, because the CPS or others have arbitrarily decided that a certain ‘group’ is racist, then anyone associated with that group, MUST be a racist? And that, any such person, who is involved in an exchange of views with a person of another race, must, in some way, be guilty of racism?
If so, isn’t this conviction-by-association, rather than actual evidence?
If an indigenous English man were to say he felt that certain groups of people, of another race, had behaved in an unfriendly manner toward him, would the CPS assume that an act of ‘racism’ had taken place against the indigenous English man, and prosecute the other parties?
It is such an outrageous suggestion that, anyone, regardless of their race, colour or creed, should be deemed, or even suspected of being a racist, just because they appear to be unfriendly toward, or disagree with someone of another race. This is a ludicrous situation, which suggests nothing less than Mind Control, as the CPS appears to suggest that they can read minds! Also, it opens up the possibility of everyone bringing racist charges against people in all walks of life.
Many people feel that the following list of people are often perceived to be ‘unfriendly’; Politicians, Businessmen, Groups of teenagers (of ALL races), Court Officials, Judges, Magistrates, Clerks, Bailiffs, Police, Barristers, Traffic Wardens, Car & Insurance Salesmen, Bankers, Tradesmen, Journalists, Council Officials, Shop Assistants, Bus & Lorry Drivers, Cyclists, Councillors, etc etc. The reality is that everyone is entitled to treat others in a friendly or otherwise manner, regardless of whether their reasons are based upon rational or irrational foundations.
People of all races exercise this right every day of their lives, and for the CPS to get involved in these day to day incidents, just because the discourse involved people from different races, is farcical.
For anyone, such as government ministers, or members of the CPS, to suggest that everyone should be forced to be ‘friendly’ to everyone else, particularly those of other races, then that person would be advocating an Orwellian / Huxlian scenario, which, God forbid, should ever happen in Great Britain.
Also, in paragraph 5, you use the term; ‘… ‘Activity’ by extremist groups…’
May I enquire as to what is meant by the term; ‘Activity’?
With regard to the term ‘Hostility’ and your example; ‘… argument over a parking place…’, does this Act automatically presume that any hostility or perceived hostility, involving people of different races, that there was a racial connotation, which only favours the non-indigenous variety of people? If so, is this not, in itself a “racist” premise? My perception is that it is. Does MY view, as an indigenous English man, count in this regard?
I am genuinely anxious to know how I and people like me, can have faith and confidence in the judicial system, of our country, when we are continuously mistreated, ignored and sidelined.
Finally, does the CPS respect the laws on Whistle Blowing and Public Interest Disclosures, including situations where national and local government officials are alleged to have committed crimes?
Due to the way the CPS pursues Patriotic Whistle Blowers, it appears as though this issue is not high up on your list of priorities; which is a shame, because if that premise is true, then the CPS would be acting in breach of public trust, which is a very serious offence. https://www.gov.uk/whistleblowing/overview
I would be grateful if you would please reply urgently, as your information is crucial to the above case, which takes place on 21st January 2013.
Thank you for your assistance. I look forward to your early response.
PS: Please see below and let me have your observations.
Here are some of the main Articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR);
Freedom of Speech; Freedom of Association; Freedom of Belief; Freedom of Expression; Freedom of Culture; Freedom of Religion; Innocent until proven guilty, by a Jury of our Peers; Freedom of Native Language;
And, above all, the Freedom to uphold our English identity, alongside our Welsh, Scottish & Irish brothers and sisters.
Does the CPS believe that indigenous English people still hold these rights? If not, then an act of genocide is being perpetrated against us…..
‘…Generally speaking, genocide does not necessarily mean the immediate destruction of a nation, except when accomplished by mass killings of all members of a nation. It is intended rather to signify a co-ordinated plan of different actions aiming at the destruction of essential foundations of the life of national groups, with the aim of annihilating the groups themselves. The objectives of such a plan would be the disintegration of the political and social institutions, of culture, language, national feelings, religion, and the economic existence of national groups, and the destruction of the personal security, liberty, health, dignity, and even the lives of the individuals belonging to such groups...’http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raphael_Lemkin
Q: Will the CPS investigate the allegations contained in the following shocking reports?