Liverpool Fan Found Not Guilty of Section 4A Public Order Act Offence at Wembley Stadium

Our client, a Liverpool Fan, was charged with a section 4A Public Order offence towards a Level 1 riot trained police officer of the Metropolitan Police TSG unit. The allegation arose during a Newcastle v Liverpool football match at Wembley Stadium.

It was alleged that our client used abusive or insulting words or behaviour with the intention of causing harassment, alarm or distress, and that such distress was in fact caused to the officer. The incident took place during the policing operation just outside the stadium and was recorded on police body-worn video.

Our client denied any intention to cause harassment, alarm or distress and did not accept that the officer had in fact suffered such harm. He maintained that the exchange occurred in the context of a football match banter environment and did not meet the legal threshold required for a Section 4A offence.

Section 4A of the Public Order Act 1986 requires the prosecution to prove that the defendant acted with intent to cause harassment, alarm or distress and that such harm was caused. Both elements must be established for a conviction.

The defendant was initially unrepresented, and the court appointed Senior Advocate, Umar Zeb, shortly before trial to conduct cross-examination of the police witness.  This was to prevent direct cross examination by the defendant of the police officer. We subsequently represented the defendant fully at no cost to him and advanced submissions to the bench that the conduct alleged, when directed towards a highly trained and experienced TSG officer, did not result in actual harassment, alarm or distress.

Our skilled advocate cross examined the officer robustly and was able to elicit evidence that the officer had received extensive training in how to deal with both high-level incidents and tense situations. Our advocate was also able to highlight that the officer had real-world experience of the same.

Following a full trial, the bench returned a verdict of not guilty. The court found that, the highly trained and experienced officer would not have been caused actual harassment, alarm or distress by our client’s actions.

We were appointed by the court to conduct cross-examination of the TSG officer under a prohibition order and remained to conclude the trial at no cost to the defendant. In support of the defence case, we relied on the authorities of R v Orum and DPP v Harvey, as well as publicly available material from the Metropolitan Police describing the specialist role and training of TSG officers, including:

• Level 1 Public Order
• Community engagement
• Advanced MOE
• Counter Terrorism operations
• CBRN (Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear) incidents
• Rapid entries
• Crime tasking’s on priority boroughs
• 24 Hours commissioners reserve patrols
• Taser building entry searches
• Prison/Stadium training

As a result of the acquittal, our client avoided both a criminal conviction and a football banning order. He was delighted with the outcome.