- Mobile site
- E-Newsletters
-
- News feed
- Find us on Twitter
@Observer_Owl
Follow Watford Observer on Twitter
- Find us on Facebook
Watford Observer
Like us on Facebook
Man fined £2,000 after racist abuse on tube (From Watford Observer)
Get involved: send your pictures, video, news and views by texting WO to 80360, or email us
Rickmansworth man fined £2,000 after racist abuse on tube
4:30pm Monday 4th February 2013 in News
By Ben Endley, Senior reporter
A Rickmansworth man who racially abused a fellow passenger on a London Underground train has been fined £2,000.
Jonathan O’Shea, 29, of High Street, made racist remarks towards a 32-year-old female passenger onboard a Metropolitan line train.
The incident happened on a westbound train travelling from Baker Street station to Eastcote station, between 9.10pm and 9.45pm on Wednesday, July 11 2012.
The victim, 32, of Peckham, took a photo of O’Shea on her mobile phone which was used by British Transport Police to identify him on CCTV and track him through the network.
O’Shea, an accounts manager, denied one count of racially aggravated harassment but was found guilty at Hammersmith Magistrates’ Court last Wednesday (January 30).
In addition to a £2,000 fine, he was ordered to pay £500 compensation, £650 costs and a £15 victim surcharge.
Speaking after the sentencing, PC Andy Burns, the investigating officer, said: "This was an intimidating experience that left the victim feeling shocked, humiliated and very upset.
"We take reports of racial abuse extremely seriously and the £2,000 fine shows just how seriously the courts take this sort of behaviour too.
"Anyone who has been a victim of this type of crime should report it to police or tube staff immediately so that it can be investigated.
"We will do everything we can to identify and arrest offenders."
- This information was supplied by British Transport Police (BTP) who would not divulge the exact nature of the comments made by Mr O’Shea, saying only that they related to the victim’s race.
Comments(31)
ezra1297
says...
11:15pm Mon 4 Feb 13
Every White country is ordered to "assimilate" its own race and culture to oblivion.
No "anti-racists" demand that of ANY non-White country.
It's genocide.
These anti-whites claim to be "anti-racist", but their actions result in the genocide of only one race, my race, White people. The true goal of immigration and assimilation is to wipe out my race.
Anti-racist is a code word for anti-White.
LSC
says...
7:11am Tue 5 Feb 13
I must confess I don't know why racial abuse is singled out; all abuse is the same to me. Calling a bald person bald is just abuse. Calling a fat person fat is just abuse. Calling a short person short is just abuse. Calling a person with learning difficulties (and therefore more vulnerable IMO) a moron is just abuse. But calling a black person black is somehow the worst of the worst. I don't really understand why that is.
If someone called me a 'middle aged balding under-achieving poorly-paid ar**ho**', then it would be the last word I would take umbrage at. The rest is just descriptive, only the last one is an offensive opinion. (Although one shared by many, no doubt!)
I think all abuse should be treated equally. If I mock a vegetarian I might get a caution, and rightly so. If I mock an Asian I might get prison. I do not see how 'protected species' status helps intergration in any way shape or form.
Roy Stockdill
says...
7:46am Tue 5 Feb 13
The result is that people are becoming afraid to open their mouths or express any opinions at all when there are members of the ethnic minorities around, since some (and I do not say all by any means) are ultra-hypersensitive and will interpret any comment by a white person to mean racial abuse and use it to foment trouble - playing the race card, it's known as.
I do NOT say that this was the case in the above story. However, since the alleged remarks or precise circumstances have not been reported, how can we know what the truth is? No mention was made of what the man's defence was or why he was found guilty. It's not said whether he represented himself or whether he was represented by a solicitor or whether he offered any defence at all. In other words, it appears to me to be a most regrettably unbalanced report and a more balanced report of the case would have been preferred.
Moreover, the remarks made by the police officer after the case appear to me to have been unnecessary. I don't recall many other cases being reported in which a police officer has made such blatantly biased comments. Why aren't police officers being quoted after court cases as saying "We take burglary extremely seriously" or "We take speeding offences extremely seriously"? Why is it only: "We take reports of racial abuse extremely seriously>
A fine of £2,000 plus £1,150 in other costs does appear disproportionate, especially when we have not been told the full circumstances, and when burglars, drug dealers and violent thugs are being let off with a rap over the knuckles. I can't help wondering whether a black or Asian person who racially abused a white person would be dealt with similarly severely?
I certainly wouldn't go as far as the comments made by ezra1297, but it does appear to me that the politically correct agenda has become a near-hysterical obsession with the authorities and that anyone who dares to express a counter opinion is having his/her freedom of speech crushed.
Finally, I agree with LSC that ALL abuse should be dealt with, not just racial abuse. However, as I have pointed out before, there have always been laws in existence to deal with such cases but it did not require an unnecessary invention of a new offence called "hate crime" which is simply over-burdening the legal system and making life for the majority even more complicated than it already is.
watford1881
says...
9:22am Tue 5 Feb 13
stuegs
says...
9:39am Tue 5 Feb 13
I think racism deserves its own category!
Roy Stockdill
says...
9:40am Tue 5 Feb 13
I would merely observe that O'Shea is an obviously Irish surname, though of course a great many people born in England of Irish ancestry have the name.
I spent many years as a local paper reporter covering court cases in Halifax and Coventry and I know that even when someone was found guilty, in all fairness it was necessary to report the defence case as well as the prosecution's. But there is no suggestion of that here.
I cannot prove it because I am not familiar with all the facts, but I suspect that given that the case was at Hammersmith - out of the WO's circulation area - last Wednesday and it was not reported here until yesterday afternoon, it was either sent to the paper by a local reporter at Hammersmith or possibly given to them by the police officer, considering his quotes at the end.
Roy Stockdill
says...
9:55am Tue 5 Feb 13
No, but many others who weren't Jewish were killed by the Nazis, including gypsies, mentally ill people, Communists, Russians and just about anyone who opposed them.
The term "racism" has such far-reaching connotations and is so wide open to misinterpretation that it has become something of a curate's egg.
My concern - and I do not mean in the case under discussion here because, as I have pointed out several times, we haven't been given all the facts - is that alleged racism and racial abuse has become such a paranoid obsession with the authorities, police and the PC brigade that it is being treated quite disproportionately to other offences.
As far as I'm concerned, I'd much rather be the subject of verbal abuse than burgled, mugged or violently assaulted. Yet the police seem to be more interested in rooting out alleged racial abuse and so-called "hate crimes" than they are in catching violent criminals.
abbotshornet
says...
10:47am Tue 5 Feb 13
Roy Stockdill
says...
11:39am Tue 5 Feb 13
I have simply been at some pains to point out that the facts of this case have been the subject of unbalanced reporting because we don't know what the man's defence was. I wasn't the judge or on the jury!
If you disagree with my premise that so-called "hate crimes" and racial abuse have become the subject of a paranoid obsession in some quarters, then say so with reasonable and logical arguments. Otherwise, you just make yourself look pathetic.
crazyfrog
says...
11:50am Tue 5 Feb 13
Roy Stockdill
says...
12:04pm Tue 5 Feb 13
That is precisely what I have been trying to ask! The essence of fair court reporting is that you should give both sides of the story, whether someone is found guilty or not. I learnt that when I was 16 years old on my first local paper in Yorkshire.
Mohandas
says...
12:15pm Tue 5 Feb 13
crazyfrog wrote:Roy 'Finally, I agree with LSC that ALL abuse should be dealt with, not just racial abuse'
seeing as the WO bothered to run this story they should include the 100% facts what did the guy say?
LSC 'I think all abuse should be treated equally'.
There is alot of very serious crime against the person and dare I say property which affects the livelihood of ordinary people that the 'justice' system with their soft touch sentencing seems to be almost ignore. Justice needs to be seen to be fairly administered.
garston tony
says...
1:56pm Tue 5 Feb 13
LSC, I agree that all abuse is wrong. But usually racist or gender abuse comes with a particularly vile connotation that you don’t get from people calling someone else bald, old or fat.
Thankfully more intelligent and less prejudiced people than you Roy realised that hate crimes do need to have their own area of law and introduced some. There is a difference between a crime carried out because the perpetrator wanted to say steal something to make some money and stealing something because the perpetrator is picking on the victim due to their race or gender orientation. The later comes with additional menace usually and indicates additional issues the culprit has that need dealing with
Watford1881, actually a white person can be a victim of racism and its ignorant to think otherwise and the colour of the skin of the victim and culprit doesn’t make the crime and better or worse! I'm white and ive experienced it myself although thankfully not for many years.
Roy Stockdill
says...
2:21pm Tue 5 Feb 13
It is as I thought, i.e. the story was given to the WO by the British Transport Police, I suggest for propaganda purposes to make their point. In other words, it is an entirely one-sided account of what happened in court and not a report by an impartial reporter. Probably, in fact, there was no reporter in court at all. There often aren't these days, since local papers seem not to have the staff to cover courts any more.
Is this not becoming a worrying form of secret justice?
And whatever you may say, Tony, I stand by my view that the legal justice system and the police are now being driven by obsessive political correctness. I find it extremely hard to accept that racial abuse is worse than a thug mugging an old lady or burgling her house.
abbotshornet
says...
2:24pm Tue 5 Feb 13
You have now resorted to being abusive it would seem.
Roy Stockdill
says...
2:45pm Tue 5 Feb 13
abbotshornet
says...
2:55pm Tue 5 Feb 13
Plus you seem a very angry person so that's another good reason to stay anonimous.
I don't care if you find my comments pertinent or not.
This forum is free for all to voice their views without your censure thank you very much.
Roy Stockdill
says...
3:10pm Tue 5 Feb 13
If I upset some people with my views, well tough! It's better than being a wishy washy fence-sitter.
LSC
says...
3:21pm Tue 5 Feb 13
I know what you mean, but I think in some cases making special laws is counter-productive to long term solutions. I know many women, and a few people from other races than my own who find it all rather patronising. I also know a few who use the gender/race card to their advantage.
I know many men who soberly claim you should NEVER hit a woman. My point is you should never hit anybody unless they are coming at you with a knife, in which case I don't care who or what they are.
Roy Stockdill
says...
3:28pm Tue 5 Feb 13
Again, I must agree with LSC. There are women and also members of the ethnic minorities who deliberately use their sex, their race, and sometimes both, to obtain advantage in their job or to screw money out of the company at a tribunal by making false allegations, using invented perceptions of sexism or racism. Of course, it's always the lawyers who actively encourage them!
abbotshornet
says...
3:59pm Tue 5 Feb 13
Without being at the scene of the incident none of us know what went on.
The magistrates in this case are (supposedly) a cross section of society, the way that the man from Rickmansworth was dealt with by them is good enough for me, I don't need to know all the ins and outs, if he was unfairly convicted he should appeal to a higher court.
Hopefully if nothing else, this article will serve as a warning to people not to be racially abusive or they can expect to be severely dealt with by the law.
Roy Stockdill
says...
4:08pm Tue 5 Feb 13
But if they break into somebody's home, mug an old lady, deal drugs in the street or knife somebody, the chances are they will get a community service order, probation or a similar slap on the wrist and not a fine of £2,000 plus another £1,165 in additional costs.
You keep telling me my views are "warped", Tony. No - it's society that has become warped by the lunatic excesses of political correctness, driven by the Guardian-reading chattering classes and strident minorities, religious, racial, and sexual, who want to make us all dance to their tune. The great "silent majority" have fewer rights any more than the minorities who make the loudest noises.
abbotshornet
says...
4:38pm Tue 5 Feb 13
The Law is for everyone, even your so called "silent majority".
You seem to be using the phrase politically correct as a dirty word.
And you seem to be making quite a noise, do you see yourself as one of the silent majority?
LSC
says...
5:56pm Tue 5 Feb 13
Sorry, can you clarify that? Are you suggesting poor people should get lighter sentences for the same crime as a rich person?
So if I'm really, really skint, mugging an old lady will get me a £20 fine, but if I'm Lord of Fulchester and mug an old lady I get 20 years? Tell me I've misread your comment please.
Roy Stockdill
says...
6:13pm Tue 5 Feb 13
As far as I'm concerned, it is a dirty word - well, a dirty phrase. Lunatic political correctness has attacked the traditional values of society that have served us perfectly well for many years.
No-one had ever heard of political correctness until a few years ago. Now it seems to have taken over all our lives. It is driven, as I said, by a minority of the Loony Left, Lib-Dem, Guardian-reading chattering classes who hold far more power than their numbers entitle them to.
The entire political agenda is being driven by strident, loud-mouthed minorities who perceive themselves as being in some way persecuted and constantly whinge and whine about it instead of just getting on with their lives as most of us do.
I see myself as speaking out on behalf of the silent majority, many of whom don't seem to have a voice that counts any more in this increasingly barmy country.
garston tony
says...
11:43am Wed 6 Feb 13
And whose saying a pensioner being mugged or her house being burgled is not as bad as racial abuse. The clue is that they are all different situations and therefore need different laws and sentencing rules. You wouldn’t charge a mugger with house burglary would you and its only an extention of that quite simple but straightforward point that means we also differentiate when a crime is committed against someone due to their race, religion, sexual orientation etc.
If people use their gender to manipulate a situation that doesn’t mean any laws regarding gender are wrong, just the people who are being devious. It also make me chuckle to see you Roy try and claim such laws are divisive and complain about those in power, this from someone who if in charge would do everything possible to get rid of anyone and anything that wasn’t to do with arian superiority from the country. You’re the last person to be talking about the lack of inclusiveness!
garston tony
says...
12:54pm Thu 7 Feb 13
davids accurate jockstrap wrote:For hundreds if not thousands of years this country has been invaded literrely and figuretively and our history and culture was influenced by outsiders well before WW2.
For hundreds,if not thousands of years, people of this island have been exhorted to forcibly resist any foreign invasion and many have lost their lives trying to do so. Since WWii, foreign invasion seems to have been encouraged and anybody resisting the invasion is currently being subject to grief. Why were the invading Germans regarded as personae non-grata and every other invader since are being welcomed with open arms? Who gets to decide these matters and why? Nothing to do with certain invaders getting into positions of power is it?
Have you never heard of William the Conquerer? A Frenchman who was in a position of power in this country ooohh, over 900 year before WW2. Not the first and not the last invader (if by the you mean someone with foreign lineage) to be in a position of power.
For that matter if you want to mention WW2 Winston Churchill was half American.
Yet another poster who doesnt seem to know much about that which they apparently hold dear enough they want to defend.
Roy Stockdill
says...
1:48pm Thu 7 Feb 13
I very much doubt the WO knew about the pending case because Hammersmith is well outside their circulation area. Even if they had done I don't imagine they would have been able to spare a reporter which would have meant losing him/her for a whole day. Had I been the news editor and known about the case, I would have ordered a report from a local freelance agency. But, as I say, I suspect they didn't know about it beforehand.
The note which has been inserted at the bottom of the story - after this debate began - makes it quite clear that the report was supplied to them by the British Transport Police. Therefore it can hardly be said to be a report from a neutral, independent source, can it?
Clearly, the BTP wanted to make a political point which is why no details were given of the defence. I question again whether they would have supplied a report of say, an assault or theft on a train, backed up by such strong quotes from the PC? I don't condone the offence, merely making the point yet again that there appears to a strong element of political correctness in this case, with the BTP possibly regarding an allegation of alleged racial abuse more seriously than other crimes on the railway, which seems lop-sided thinking to me.
Roy Stockdill
says...
2:07pm Thu 7 Feb 13
>For that matter if you want to mention WW2 Winston Churchill was half American.<
As far as I recall, the Americans were on OUR side!
William the Conqueror was, as you say, a long time ago but his descendants have been ruling the country ever since. The Normans may have enslaved the English almost a millennium ago but they eventually adopted the English language and culture, otherwise we would all have been speaking French now. The point "davids accurate jockstrap" (curious nom de plume) was making was that many more recent immigrants seem to make little attempt to integrate into British society and our way of life and to be here only to take advantage of our benefits and housing and to send money back to their own lands, thus taking it out of the British economy.
Harking back to William I, there was a much more recent invasion of Britain which was the "Glorious Revolution" of William of Orange and his wife Mary to overthrow Mary's father, the Catholic James II, who planned to have his son James The Old Pretender succeed him and thus establish a Catholic dynasty which was not welcomed in the land. William and Mary's invasion can hardly be called such because they were invited.
Roy Stockdill
says...
6:31pm Thu 7 Feb 13
Roy Stockdill says...
9:54pm Mon 4 Feb 13
Is there not a danger that political correctness is taking over this country and our legal system and that allegations of supposed racial abuse are in fact misunderstood and exaggerated?
I am not saying this was the case here, but unless the full facts are reported how can we know? Some members of the ethnic minorities are extremely hypersensitive in what they perceive to be racial abuse.