'Silent man' who has blocked traffic for over a decade caught doing it again
It is just a month after David Hampson was jailed for his last road-blocking offence. Hampson always chooses the same spot for his action, namely the junction outside Swansea Central police station in the middle of Swansea.
After being arrested for obstructing the highway the 55-year-old refuses to engage with police officers, lawyers, doctors, court staff, judges, and probation staff, and the reasons for his behaviour remain unknown.
Over the last 10 years the defendant has sat through multiple trials to determine whether he can talk and is simply choosing not to or whether there is some psychological or physical issue preventing him from speaking - in legal terms to determine whether he is "mute of malice" or "mute by visitation of God" - and trials to determine whether he is guilty to standing in the road.
Hampson refuses to enter pleas to any charge, refuses to call any evidence in his defence, and has always remained silent throughout the trials, usually just looking down at the floor of the dock when asked a question.
Swansea Magistrates Court heard the latest offence happened on June 19 this year when Hampson stood in the middle of De La Beche Street outside Swansea Central police station blocking the traffic until he was arrested. From the point of arrest he refused to speak.
After refusing to enter a plea, a "not guilty" plea was entered on his behalf and he was subsequently convicted at trial of obstructing the highway. The incident happened 28 days after Hampson was sentenced to six months in prison for doing exactly the same thing at the same location.
David Hampson, of no fixed abode, was sentenced to six months in prison. He will serve no more than half the sentence in custody before being released on licence to serve the remainder in the community.
The defendant has been repeating a similar pattern of road-blocking then remaining silent since 2014 when he was given a two-year conditional discharge for four counts of wilfully obstructing free passage along the highway.
The following year he was convicted of a public nuisance offence for the same behaviour, and was made the subject of his first criminal behaviour order or 'Crasbo.' However, his behaviour continued and he subsequently received custodial sentences after being convicted of breaching the court order in 2016, 2017 and again in 2018 when he was sentenced to 42 months in prison.
In December 2021 Hampson was again arrested outside Swansea Central police station after he blocked the road at the junction of Mount Pleasant and De La Beche Street. The defendant was initially detained under the Mental Health Act, and once his identity was established from his driving licence he was arrested for breaching the Crasbo.
He made no reply when cautioned nor when he was subsequently charged. He remained silent when he appeared at Swansea Magistrates Court and the case was committed to Swansea Crown Court.
The defendant remained silent during his appearance at the higher court in May 2022 and refused to talk when asked to enter a plea, meaning a "not guilty" plea was recorded on his behalf and the matter went to trial in July.
Before the jurors could decide whether Hampson had obstructed the highway or not, they had to determine whether he was "mute of malice" or "mute by visitation of god" - that is, whether he could speak and was choosing not to or whether there was some physical or other issue which was preventing him from speaking.
After hearing evidence from prison officers who said defendant had spoken to them while he was an inmate at HMP Swansea the jury found that he was mute of malice and subsequently found that he did carry out the act of blocking the road and breaching his criminal behaviour order.
Following the jury's findings the judge ordered a psychiatric report into Hampson in the hope it would cast some light on his behaviour and suggest possible help that he could be offered. However, the defendant refused to speak to the court-appointed doctor so no interview could take place.
In response to his non-co-operation, the court ordered that his medical records be produced and given to the psychiatrist so some information about him and his background was known.
The case returned court in the August of that year for a report from the doctor, and the medic concluded that though Hampson's mutism was "selective and deliberate" there may be social or financial "stresses" that contributed to his decision not to talk. The doctor said he was not able to diagnose any psychiatric or other condition and so a hospital order could not be proposed as a way of dealing with the defendant.
At that hearing judge Huw Rees said there may well be "social stresses" involved in Hampson's decision not to speak but in his view the defendant's silence was the result of "breath-taking arrogance and insolence" on his part. The defendant was sentenced to three-and-a-half years in prison.
In October 2023 Hampson returned to the road outside Swansea Central police station and again blocked traffic. Officers took the defendant aside and spoke to him but he did not engage. He was advised to leave the area but he went straight back into the road and so was arrested.
When Hampson appeared before justices charged with obstructing the highway he refused to speak or acknowledge the court and as he did not enter a plea to the charge, a plea of not guilty was entered on his behalf. The defendant was bailed pending a trial and left the court building and went back to standing in the road. He was arrested again, charged and remanded into custody ahead of a trial.
Hampson again refused to speak when he appeared in the dock for his trial in December, did not challenge the prosecution case nor put forward any defence, and was convicted of two counts of obstructing the highway. He was sentenced to six months in prison.
After being released from custody he returned to the street outside Swansea Central police station on April 8 this year. Firearms officers escorted the defendant off the road and warned him that if he repeated the behaviour he would be arrested.
A short time later the defendant returned to the carriageway and was arrested. The defendant was arrested and taken into the police station and was subsequently granted bail. He returned to the middle of the road and was arrested and remanded into custody.
On May 22 he was convicted of obstructing the highway and was sentenced to six months in prison.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Spectator
13 hours ago
- Spectator
There's nothing worse than male trouser trouble
First, there was the bizarre tale of the poor unfortunate man who, after dropping his trousers on the District line near Upton Park, was set upon by an outraged gang, beaten and then forcibly expelled from the Tube. And then, just a day or so before, the perpetually beleaguered Gregg Wallace caused a similar degree of opprobrium when he put out a video in which he addressed allegations of bad behaviour involving a lack of trousers. What on earth is going on? On Instagram, Wallace announced, with a touch of the Beowulf poet: 'Would you like the truth about the stories regarding me taking my trousers down, listen! There are no findings in the investigation that I took my trousers down in front of anybody.' He ended his video by repeating, sternly: 'Any claim that the report says differently is not true.' So there we have it. Gregg Wallace may be many things, but he is not a trouser-dropper – unlike the anonymous semi-flasher on the Underground, who definitely was, has now been detained for his own good under the Mental Health Act. A warning, perhaps, to those of us who, now that the weather is becoming disconcertingly warm once again, might fancy a little impromptu chino removal on public transport for our comfort. Yet in truth, the idea of taking down one's trousers is an innate source of English fascination that has been a staple of comedy since Chaucer and Shakespeare, and is likely to remain so until the day we are all wafting round in unisex kimonos. The reason why trousers – more than any other form of attire – are imbued with such comic potential is that the average English gentleman associates them with his dignity. Lose them, and his sang-froid tumbles to the floor along with the fabric. It was no wonder that the Aldwych farces and Carry On films all made considerable weather of their stiff, not-so-buttoned-up characters being compelled to cover their reduced dignity in increasingly absurd circumstances as their breeches sally off into the sunset. I would like to say that the loss of trousers is something that only occurs on stage and in film, but alas, I can testify that it is all too real. In my home city of Oxford, I have seen many cruelly abandoned pairs of formal trews in the street, presumably after a heavily misspent night involving fine wine. Nor is this limited to the young. A friend tells how, after a wild evening on Clapham Common with some newfound friends resulted in his being debagged, he cycled past the scene of the crime the next day to see his once-beloved slacks fluttering mournfully in the wind – the mute observer to whatever unspeakable things had happened in that particular spot. As for the shame's memorialisation in memoir, another friend – a leading light in the entertainment industry – has confessed that, should he ever put finger to keyboard and write his autobiography, it could only be called A Life Without Trousers, so torrid have his exploits in this field been. I would dearly love at this point to confess that I know nothing of such things, but unfortunately I recently had my own narrow brush with infamy. A few months ago, I was strolling along Hampstead Heath with my family when, to our horror, a tree fell just behind us, nearly causing grave hurt, or worse. We scrambled to safety just in time, with no worse injury than a few cuts and bruises – but as I realised that we were largely unharmed, I also realised that the sudden impact on the ground had sent my kecks cascading round my knees. To be found dead and trouserless on Hampstead Heath: now that, I fear, is the end that many of my enemies would wish on me. But I intend to give them the dissatisfaction of continuing to live – with the bottom of my trousers rolled – for many a well-furnished year to come, God willing.
Spectator
3 days ago
- Spectator
Of course shoplifters are scumbags
A familiar cliché, which in history has been disproved time and again, is that a police force cannot operate without the consent of the people. Tell that to the residents of what was once East Berlin. But that old canard raises a different problem. Which people are giving the consent? The ones who abide by the law, or the ones who are disposed to breaking it? I wondered about this when I read two stories over the weekend, both of which suggested to me that the police have long since lost the support of that first group of people, that more numerous community, the people who don't habitually break the law. The first case concerned a nutter on the Tube, somewhere on the Hammersmith and City line, who decided to drop his trousers and underpants and display his pork truncheon to the various women, children and men who were his fellow passengers. There is a video online of what happened next. A male passenger remonstrates with the bloke and tells him to pull his trousers up. The nutter shouts 'fuck off' repeatedly and becomes aggressive – at which point three or four men wrestle him to the ground and out of the train at the next station, pinioning him with his hands behind his back. He is taken into custody by an off-duty copper and decanted into a convenient booby hatch. After the incident, British Transport Police revealed they were investigating the matter with a view to prosecuting the vigilantes for assault. Part of the statement read as follows: 'The man had been assaulted by a number of other passengers and was initially arrested by an off-duty officer, before being detained under the Mental Health Act and taken to hospital.' I am assuming you agree with me that it is not OK to drop your drawers and start waving your gremlins around at other passengers on public transport and that the men who intervened did the right thing, even if they were perhaps a little brusque. I would further venture that the nutter was remarkably lucky he didn't get a good beating. And I suspect most people would agree with this assessment – but not the police. They are once again more interested in preserving the dignity and security of the offender than they are with the sensibilities of the public. The same applies to the frankly astonishing case of Rob Davies, who owns a retro clothing store in Wrexham called Run Ragged. He put up a notice in his window which read as follows: 'Due to scumbags shoplifting, please ask for assistance to open cabinets.' Somebody reported this little sign to the police and, true to form, a couple of dense coppers turned up at his shop and advised him to remove the notice lest it give offence to people. Mr Davies told me that he asked the coppers to whom the notice might give offence – shoplifters, for example? He also asked if the police's view was that shoplifters were not actually scumbags, but did not receive an intelligible answer. The irony in this particular case is quite exquisite. Mr Davies said that his store had been the target of shoplifters on five occasions so far this year, and on only one occasion did the police turn up to investigate. In that instance they caught the shoplifter and returned to Mr Davies the shirt that had been stolen, but let the thief off without so much as a warning. The only good news to come out of this is that Mr Davies has rejected the advice to take down his notice – or, rather, he has taken the original scrawled sign down and rewritten it five times the size on a larger piece of paper. He believes – and I agree with him – that the police behaviour in this episode suggests that not only has shoplifting been decriminalised, but that the shoplifters constitute a 'vulnerable' community and that their sensibilities should not be disquieted by being called mildly nasty names. Again, I would suggest that a good 90 per cent of the country would be on Rob Davies's side in this dispute, just as I would imagine a similar proportion would lament the fact that the coppers no longer give a monkeys about shoplifting. I daresay a few idiots will insist that it is not a crime for the starving to steal to save their lives – and that would seem to be the premise upon which the police operate: that shoplifters are the downtrodden, the poor, the 'vulnerable', and that one should give them every inch of leeway available. Both stories also indicate how our society is breaking down and both stories make life in the UK that little bit more perilous and dismal. The consequence of what happened in the first story is that surely fewer people will be minded to intervene if they see someone committing an illegal act, because they fear that they themselves might end up getting prosecuted by the old bill. And so instead they will sit and watch, rendered passive by a police force which has forgotten the reason it exists. And in the second case? What you will see is exactly what has happened in those liberal American cities which have more or less officially decriminalised shoplifting. The former streets of commerce will be a vista of boarded-up shopfronts, with countless small enterprises forced out of existence. And as a consequence of that, our economy will show even less inclination of growing. Like the landlords forced out of business because the fashionable view today is that all landlords are bastards and all renters downtrodden angels and owners of property should therefore not be able to do what they like with their houses, so the shop owners will go bust because we – or our authorities – have decided that shoplifters are nicer than shop owners and should never, ever, be called scumbags.
Daily Mirror
3 days ago
- Daily Mirror
Depraved police officer said 'my life's f*****' as he was arrested
Owen Mills, 22, from Cornwall, made "sexual contact" with a woman who had brain damage due to alcoholism and he had been tasked with supervising, a court heard An officer who made "sexual contact" with a vulnerable woman in a police car as well as sending her racy messages, said "my life's f*****" when arrested. A court heard how Owen Mills had been tasked with supervising the woman, who had brain damage due to alcoholism. The 22-year-old made his depraved move while she was detained in a police car, having been turned away from one hospital, before further explicit contact was made when the pair were alone in a second hospital for 'about 20 minutes'. Mills, a former officer with Staffordshire Police, went on to send racy messages to the woman while she was kept in hospital. Stoke-on-Trent Crown Court heard that Mills had also sent inappropriate messages to another woman, who had been witness to a shoplifting crime. Mills resigned from his position with the force in June 2023, reported StokeonTrentLive. Prosecutor Kat Shields described how Mills first made sexual contact with the vulnerable woman after she had been turned away from Harplands Hospital, a mental health facility in Stoke. She said: "He took part in the transport of the woman to Harplands Hospital where she was to be detained under the Mental Health Act. The hospital would not accept her as a patient. She was turned away. She was detained in a police car. "An officer informed Mills to remain with her and he explicitly instructed him to turn his body worn footage on. Mills acknowledged that instruction. What followed was sexual contact between Mills and the woman in the back of the police car while detained under the Mental Health Act outside the hospital. "When his colleague returned the woman seemed happier and bubblier. He thought Mills had put her at ease. She was taken to St George's Hospital in Stafford where a bed had become available. At the hospital Mills was again left alone with the woman. They were alone for about 20 minutes. Sexual contact again took place between them." The court heard the woman was admitted to St George's for a number of days and she exchanged messages with Mills. Miss Shields said: "The messages continued on Christmas Eve. They were of a sexually explicit nature and referred to the interactions they had had in the police car outside hospital and in the waiting room at the other hospital. On Christmas Day he sent her a message which said, 'I want you all over me'." On New Year's Day he sent her a photo of himself in a police uniform. In January the woman asked staff at a mental health care facility if it was alright to be seeing a police officer. Mills was arrested on January 12, 2023. He told officers, 'That is it, my life is f*****'. He was suspended but resigned from the force on June 6, 2023. The court also heard Mills had been crewed with just male officers after a number of female officers had reported to their superiors that he made them feel uncomfortable due to his sexual comments and childish behaviour. And in another incident Mills took a statement from a woman shop worker in relation to a shoplifting offence in September 2022. He asked her for her phone number. She told him he already had it on the form and he stored the number in her phone and texted her. The pair then exchanged messages and there was a WhatsApp conversation between them between October 2, 2022 and January 4, 2023. Miss Shields said: "He sent her a topless photograph and asked her to send nude photographs in return. She declined, although she did send one of herself in a bra. He sent a video of himself masturbating. They did not meet up and later lost touch." Miss Shields added: "A deterrent sentence is necessary. He was an inexperienced police officer at the time. But that does not excuse his very serious offending and his manipulation of two women in this case, one of them extremely vulnerable." Mills, of Bude, Cornwall, pleaded guilty to two charges of corrupt or improper exercise of police powers or privileges. Elizabeth Power, mitigating, said Mills was aged 18 when he joined the police. She said: "It is clear from the statements he received little or no support from his colleagues and how they viewed him. He was a young man isolated from his family and those around him. It is clear it is born out of some degree of loneliness and isolation. "He takes full responsibility for his actions. He accepts overstepping the line. He has some insight into his offending and how his offending has brought the police service into disrepute. He accepts it amounts to a serious breach of trust. He is now maturing. He is 22. He was of good character. He has lost that good character." Miss Power added that Mills may be targeted in a prison environment. Mills was jailed for up to two years. Judge Richard McConaghy said Mills abused his position as a police officer to engage with a witness in a criminal investigation. He said: "You were doing so for your own sexual gratification." Judge McConaghy said Mills' interactions with the second woman were more serious. He said: "When your colleague was inside the hospital discussing whether or not she was to be admitted, you were tasked with supervising her and taking care of her welfare, but you engaged in physical sexual contact with her. "It is clear from the messages the two of you engaged in further sexual contact in the hospital waiting area. In the aftermath you continued to contact her and a sexual relationship followed. "Members of the public must be able to trust the police. They must be able to trust that those in a vulnerable position are not exploited by the police. You knew what your responsibilities were and you ignored them to your own sexual end. The vast majority of police officers work very hard and maintain high standards. Those who offend in the way you did undermine the confidence that the public can have in the police." The judge said the offending was so serious only immediate custody was appropriate. Mills will serve 40 per cent of the jail term with the rest on licence.
