|Alleged Race Attacks||Jeffrey Turner|
LAST MONTH an article in Spearhead focused on an incident in which a partly black teenager, who claimed to have had his face and arms burned in a racial attack by Whites, was later arrested by police on suspicion of criminal deception.
Since then, two further cases have come to public notice with similarities to this one.
In March it was reported that a Birmingham man, Chris Cotter, had been the victim of a stabbing by "racists". Cotter, though white, was known to be the boyfriend of black olympic athlete Ashia Hansen. Cotter, also an athlete, backed up his story of a "racist" attack with samples given to the police of alleged "hate mail" sent to him by a group called the "White Aryan Nazi Organisation" (WANO). Shortly afterwards three other sports stars, all black, received almost identical letters.
As might be expected, the media took up the story with enthusiasm, with lurid tales about the growing menace of "racism". Home Office Minister Mike O'Brien got in on the act, with a statement that there was "no room for complacency" about racist violence.
There was only one problem with the "hate mail" letters. Neither the local police nor Special Branch, whose job it is to keep files on political groups, had ever heard of WANO.
Then on May 22nd it was announced that Cotter and two others had been arrested and would face charges of faking the story about the circumstances of the attack; sending racist material with intent to cause harassment, alarm or distress; and conspiracy to obtain financial gain by selling stories concerning the case to the newspapers.
The other two, Surjit Singh Claire of Walsall and Craig Alan Wynn of Birmingham, also face charges of conspiracy to inflict grievous bodily harm on Cotter.
In another incident, curiously also in Birmingham, it was reported that a black man was attacked by "racists" and set on fire. This happened on the 1st May. Immediately, screaming press headlines about the incident followed, with the predictable condemnations of "racism". Politicians, clerics and media folk jumped in. Liberal Democrat leader Charles Kennedy said in parliament that the attack "should act as an important pointer to every politician in this house that we should not conduct ourselves in a way that panders to the worst racial prejudice in this country." This was just a cheap party-political jibe at Tory leader Hague immediately after the latter had tried to capitalise on the asylum-seeker crisis. The Right Rev. Mark Santer, Bishop of Birmingham, said: "This was an unspeakably vicious crime. Birmingham is home to a multi-cultural community and one racist attack is an attack on us all." Then left-wing film-maker Ken Loach, speaking at the Cannes festival, condemned the fact that less media coverage had been given to the reported burning than to the defacing of the Churchill statue in Parliament Square by the anti-capitalist rioters.
But after all this huff and puff, and the usual ritual denunciations of "racism" right across the board, what happened? The black man, Ashley Kane (24) was charged on the 17th May with wasting police time over the incident. Twenty-five officers had been assigned to the case and had interviewed hundreds of people (something which almost certainly would not have happened if the alleged victim had been white). It was reported in the Daily Mail the next day: "Police revealed that they were no longer treating the incident... as a racist attack. Three people have been charged with conspiracy to defraud and with wasting police time."
Yet Kane was earlier reported to have had "severe burns to the head and arms" and to be "under sedation in intensive care." Question: were his injuries as bad as claimed or was there some dishonest reporting of them?
Indeed, both these stories stink. Cotter was also reported to have been badly hurt, having lost four pints of blood and being placed in intensive care; police stated he could have died. This is a very painful, not to say dangerous, way to pay for a mere "stunt". Were Cotter and Kane hurt as claimed? Or were certain "inducements" offered them by certain shadowy people to undergo a degree of suffering in a "good cause"? The latter suggestion may seem fantastic but no more so than the two incidents as reported.
What these cases certainly do illustrate is the quite cynical way in which the anti-racist lobby is anxious to use every criminal incident where there is a racial factor to condemn "racists" and "racism" - quite regardless of the actual evidence.