Police deny having invented a crime

The police are insisting they were justified in charging a man with incitement to racial hatred, refuting allegations that the charges were false and borne out of spite.

A case against entrepreneur Keith Marshall was dropped two weeks ago when the accusing officer failed to turn up to testify and the magistrate in question ruled the case was time-barred.

Mr Marshall was charged with inciting racial hatred last month. The charges referred to an incident last September, when Mr Marshall had called police to tow a car blocking his garage.

He said three police officers only showed up after five hours, with one sergeant aggressively demanding that Mr Marshall open the garage before towing the car in question.

Mr Marshall subsequently called the police station to report the sergeant.

Months later, he was charged with inciting racial hatred.

Mr Marshall, who has led a number of humanitarian missions to Ethiopia and Tanzania, said the charges came as bolt out of the blue and left him baffled.

In court, his lawyer accused the police of having invented a crime and charging an innocent man purely out of spite.

But the police have vehemently denied the allegation and stood by the sergeant in question, saying that when he asked for Mr Marshall’s particulars, the latter started uttering certain phrases invoking Africa, coloured and boat people.

“These phrases were interpreted by the sergeant as offences tantamount to incitement of racial hatred and consequently, criminal charges to that effect, as well as from vilification and threats made to a public officer, were issued,” the police said, without specifying exactly what was said.

Contrary to what the magistrate had said, both crimes carried a prescriptive period of two years rather than three months and could therefore be appealed, the police said.

They, however, said they would not be appealing the judgement. “Upon investigating this case more thoroughly, it is the opinion of... the force that the phrases uttered by Mr Marshall... were not meant to incite violence or racial hatred but only to justify and substantiate his stand...”

The police sergeant involved has since been promoted to an inspector. His failure to appear in court to testify against Mr Marshall was not down to negligence, the police said, but because he was prosecuting another case at the time.

In the wake of the case but prior to the police issuing their statement, Mr Marshall had spoken to The Times about the broader implications of his case.

“It’s very disconcerting that the police can throw out charges and put a person through the anxiety of a legal process on a whim,” he had said.

He added that while he simply wanted to put the matter behind him, “there’s a very big hole in the bucket if police can target someone without anything deterring them from making things up”.

The police, however, are adamant there was nothing made up about the case, saying the charges were based on the sergeant’s “unilateral” conclusions in accordance with “the relative section of the law and certainly not due to any vexatious or spiteful intent.”