Latest news with #Tooting
Yahoo
24-05-2025
- Yahoo
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.
Telegraph
24-05-2025
- Telegraph
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.' 'I'm a grown man of 62, but I cried' 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.' 'Procedural issue' 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.'
BBC News
06-05-2025
- Business
- BBC News
Utility company pays £7,000 over unsafe Tooting roadworks
Utility company pays £7,000 over unsafe roadworks 11 minutes ago Share Save Charlotte Lillywhite Local Democracy Reporting Service Share Save Google Maps Electricity Network Company Ltd was carrying out roadworks in Trinity Crescent A utility company has been ordered to pay more than £7,000 for unsafely carrying out roadworks in south London last summer. Electricity Network Company (ENC) Ltd did not used adequate signs, cones and barriers during the works on Trinity Crescent, in Tooting, in August 2024, it was found. The company pled guilty to breaching safety regulations and said it had "sincere regret" over the incident. It was ordered to pay a fine and costs of £7,016 at Lavender Hill Magistrates' Court on 22 April. 'Excellent reputation' Jenny Yates, Wandsworth cabinet member for transport, said the company's "carelessness" posed a danger to residents. "The outcome of this case sends a clear message that we will not tolerate companies taking risks in our borough and we will hold them firmly to account," she said. Photos were taken by a visiting council network controller while the roadworks were carried out, which ENC acknowledged showed the arrangement of pedestrian barriers were inadequate and did not meet safety standards. The company said it took its health and safety duties very seriously, and otherwise had an "excellent reputation for safety and quality of work" across Wandsworth and the UK. An ENC director told the Local Democracy Reporting Service (LDRS) that it was "immensely disappointing" to "have their reputation called into question". They said the company usually had a "consistently high site standard" for customers and added that the business has taken "firm action to ensure those concerned are fully aware of the high standards we look to achieve, reach and maintain in all aspects of our work, of which public safety is a primary consideration". Listen to the best of BBC Radio London on Sounds and follow BBC London on Facebook, X and Instagram. Send your story ideas to
BBC News
02-05-2025
- Sport
- BBC News
Jersey Bulls fail in points deduction appeal
Jersey Bulls have failed in the appeal against a points deduction that cost them the Combined Counties Premier South islanders were docked three points after played a suspended player in their 4-0 win over Tooting and Mitcham in late March. The club had appealed to the Football Association (FA) to try and overturn the points deduction, but the appeal was Combined Counties League is assessing a number of other cases of ineligible players, and as yet no dates for the play-offs have been it stands Bulls will drop to third place in the league table, although it is understood rivals Redhill are also facing a similar charge to Bulls and, if similarly punished, would drop to third with Whyteleafe winning the title. In a statement Jersey Bulls say the FA's judgement read: "Having played an ineligible player, League Rule 6.9 directs that the Club shall have any points gained from the match in question deducted. "The Appeal Board concluded that there were no exceptional circumstances in this case, and that the process that had been followed was fair."The case centred on midfielder Toby Ritzema who received 10 bookings - one coming in the FA mistakenly counted that booking as counting towards the 10, and therefore he served a two-match ban in the league when he did not need to. He subsequently passed the 10-booking threshold in league games, and should have been suspended for the Tooting and Mitcham win on 29 March,.
BBC News
24-04-2025
- Sport
- BBC News
Play-offs postponed as Bulls appeal points deduction
The Combined Counties League Premier South promotion play-offs have been postponed while Jersey Bulls' appeal against a points deduction is island side finished the season top of the table, but have had three points docked for fielding a player who should have been Ritzema had passed the threshold for a suspension after picking up too many yellow cards but played in the 4-0 win over Tooting and Mitcham United on 20 the Bulls appeal fail they will drop to third place in the play-offs were due to begin on Saturday 26 April between the sides finishing second to fifth, with the winners gaining promotion to the eighth tier of English football. "The judicial process impacting the playoff positions has not completed and until it has these matches will be on hold," A statement from the Combined Counties League read."The league will provide an update when the situation has progressed to an appropriate stage."When Jersey Bulls were docked points last week the club said there was "significant mitigation" that was "based on the lack of clarity on the number of yellow cards".
