Ulez protesters cleared of harassing Sadiq Khan
A group of anti-Ulez protesters found guilty of harassing Sir Sadiq Khan have had their convictions quashed.
Four activists were charged over a demonstration named 'Khanage at Khan's' and subsequently found guilty after a trial at Westminster magistrates' court.
The Telegraph can reveal they have now been cleared of harassment after the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) received 'new information' which undermined evidence in its case.
The protest was organised last April in response to the Mayor's controversial ultra-low emission zone [Ulez] expansion to the outer boroughs of London.
Motorists with non-compliant polluting vehicles must pay £12.50 a day to drive across all London boroughs.
Activists who have campaigned against Ulez have said the charge is having an impact on their commutes to work and even keeping some families apart.
A court heard the protest took place around 328ft (100m) from Sir Sadiq's home in Tooting, south London, according to the BBC.
All four entering not guilty pleas – Nicholas Arlett, 74, West Wickham, Martin Whitehead, 62, Beckhenham, Alison Young, 51, from Windsor and Lloyd Dunsford, 65, from Bexleyheath – were convicted of 'harassment of a person in his home' following a trial in December.
However, shortly after some of the group began the process of appealing their convictions, the CPS confirmed it would not be contesting an appeal.
As a result all four convictions were quashed by Judge Peter Lodder KC on May 15 at Kingston Crown Court.
Speaking to the Telegraph, Mr Whitehead, said: 'I'm not a serial protester – this is the only thing I've ever protested about – Ulez.'
The plasterer said that shortly after the trial he felt he had to 'explain himself' to those who had read about his conviction in the media.
'A lot of the newspapers got hold of the stories when we were convicted and that hurt a lot as well because it was widely publicised,' he said.
'We were made to look like we were horrible people and that got to me as well because all my neighbours saw it and people I worked for saw it – I had to explain myself.'
Reflecting on the day he found out his conviction had been quashed, Mr Whitehead said: 'I'm obviously over the moon that it's over and done with… we weren't expecting it at all – I mean, I'm a grown man of 62, but I cried.'
A BBC report of the trial stated that the Mayor was not thought to have been in his house during the protest, but District Judge Daniel Sternberg said neighbours on the street were 'disrupted in their private lives whilst in their homes'.
The judge also reportedly said the demonstration was loud and featured amplified music, including the theme tune to the television series The Bill, and that there was 'offensive language'.
He said he was satisfied that the protesters 'knew, or ought to have known, that their presence was likely to cause alarm or distress to Sadiq Khan'.
Mr Whitehead, Ms Young and Mr Dunsford were each fined £500, with a victim surcharge of £200.
Mr Arlett had a higher level of culpability than the others and was fined £750, along with a £300 victim surcharge.
However, now the groups' convictions have been quashed, any full or partial payments made will be repaid.
The victim surcharge is used to support victims of crime through the Victim and Witness General Fund – which means the money paid in this case will not go to Sir Sadiq himself.
A CPS spokesperson told The Telegraph: 'We have a duty to keep every case under continuous review and after receiving new information which undermined the evidence in our case, we did not contest the defendants' right to appeal their conviction.'
A Metropolitan Police spokesman said the decision was down to a 'procedural issue' rather than any problems with the 'substance of the evidence'.
They said they were unable to provide further details.
Lawyer Luke Gittos, who was representing two of the protesters at the time the convictions were quashed, said it was very rare for convictions to be quashed at this stage.
Mr Gittos, whose firm did not represent any of the group during the trial, said: 'It's extremely rare – it's an implicit concession that the convictions were wrongly obtained and that happens very rarely.'
The Telegraph approached representatives of Sir Sadiq for a comment but they did not provide one.
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


New York Times
2 hours ago
- New York Times
Judge in Hockey Canada sexual assault trial sets verdict date for July 24
LONDON, Ont. – Justice Maria Carroccia set July 24 as the decision date in the Hockey Canada sexual assault trial. During Tuesday's proceedings, in which the defense continued closing arguments, Carroccia said verdicts would be delivered in person on that date. Michael McLeod, Carter Hart, Alex Formenton, Dillon Dubé and Cal Foote are all charged with sexual assault after an alleged incident in June 2018. The complainant — a woman known as E.M., whose identity is protected by a publication ban — has said she was sexually assaulted over the span of several hours in a London, Ont., hotel room. The players were in town for a Hockey Canada event celebrating their gold medal at the 2018 World Junior Championship. Advertisement McLeod is also facing a second charge for 'being a party to the offense' for what the Crown has asserted was his role 'assisting and encouraging his teammates to engage sexually' with E.M. All five players have pleaded not guilty at the commencement of the trial, which is in its eighth and final week. — The Athletic's Kamila Hinkson contributed reporting remotely from Montreal. (Photo by Andy Devlin / Getty Images)


Forbes
2 hours ago
- Forbes
Polls On Harvey Weinstein, Sean 'Diddy' Combs, And #MeToo
In a news story about Harvey Weinstein's trial for sexual assault, New York Times reporter Hurubie Meko noted the difference between the movie mogul's first trial in 2020 and the ongoing one in the same courthouse. The 2020 courtroom was 'overflowing with reporters prepared to broadcast every moment of his trial to an avid audience.' Now, she wrote, '[n]o cameras wait to catch a glimpse of his arrival. A cordoned-off press area in front of the courthouse sits empty.' Does the lack of attention represent backsliding or gender regression in terms of public concern about sexual harassment or assault, as some have suggested? Is #MeToo finished? What do the polls say? I'm not aware of any new public polling on the movement that came to prominence in 2017, but there are many polls from recent years that can point us to some answers. The allegations in late 2017 of harassment and assault across many industries were a public wake-up call with a high level of pollster attention. A 2017 Economist/YouGov poll found that 86% of women and 75% of men believed sexual harassment was a very or somewhat serious problem. In an Ipsos/NPR poll from 2017, 59% of women said they had experienced harassment. A 2017 Pew Research Center poll found that 66% believed harassment and assault were indications of widespread problems in society; only 28% said they were isolated incidents. In the polls, men and women agreed about what constituted harassment. More than nine in ten men and women said that a man taking a photo up a woman's skirt was always or usually harassment, and separately, a man exposing himself, or a man asking for sexual favors, were considered harassment. Fewer than 10% of either sex said a man asking a women out for a drink was. When asked over time about workplace harassment, 55% of women in 1998 told Gallup it was a major problem. That rose to 73% in 2017 but receded slightly, to 70% in 2019. In each case, men were less likely to describe it as a major problem, with more men than women saying it was a minor problem. Hardly anyone of either sex volunteered that it wasn't a problem. An Economist/YouGov poll in 2019 asked how serious the problem was in different industries. 'Hollywood' was the top response, at 75%. Far fewer, a third, reported it was ever a serious problem in their own workplaces. Given the findings above, concerns about backsliding seem unwarranted. It is hard for any movement to sustain the kind of energy #MeToo had in 2017. Americans simply move on to other important day-to-day concerns. Another reason, perhaps, for less attention is that most women do not experience harassment often. Regular YouGov tracking since 2020 shows that around 75% of women say they have not experienced sexual harassment in the past month. Around 8% have. Many Americans also believe the movement brought positive change. Seventy percent told Pew in a 2022 poll about #MeToo that compared to five years prior, it was more likely that people who commit harassment and assault would be held responsible. Only 7% said it was less likely. Additionally, most Americans probably made up their minds about Harvey Weinstein long ago, and revisiting his crimes is unlikely to be of as much interest. The music mogul Sean 'Diddy' Combs trial for sex trafficking and racketeering in another NYC courtroom is getting considerable attention. Polls from 2024 show that Americans who have an opinion about him have a very negative one. Also dampening intensity for #MeToo is the fact that in some high profile cases the facts were murky. That is probably why Dr. Christine Blasey Ford's claims in 2018 about a 1980 high school assault by Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh did not derail his nomination. How could we really know what, if anything, happened? Women also know that they have made enormous strides in the workplace and elsewhere where discrimination was rife in the past and harassment more common. After a dip in 2018, which may have been related to #MeToo or Donald Trump's election or something else, a small majority of women have told Gallup they are satisfied with women's position in society. But there is still work to be done. Reading even a few paragraphs about the testimony at these two NYC trials isn't for the fainthearted, and men and women recognize that there are some very bad actors who must be held accountable for their actions. #MeToo brought attention to the problem and for most people now it is being addressed, albeit imperfectly.


Washington Post
5 hours ago
- Washington Post
L.A. protesters express anger, demand justice
National L.A. protesters express anger, demand justice June 10, 2025 | 1:15 PM GMT Protesters gathered outside the Federal Building in downtown Los Angeles on June 9, sharing their anger towards the ICE raids and demanded justice.