Mangrove Nine

The Mangrove Nine were a group of British black activists tried for inciting a riot at a protest, in 1970, against the police targeting of the Mangrove Restaurant, Notting Hill, in west London. Their trial lasted 55 days and involved various challenges by the Nine to the legitimacy of the judicial process.[1] They were all acquitted of the most serious charges and the trial became the first judicial acknowledgement of behaviour motivated by racial hatred within the Metropolitan Police.[2]

March on Portnall Road

Barbara Beese during the demonstration of 9 August 1970

The Mangrove Restaurant was an important meeting space for the black community in the Notting Hill area, including for black intellectuals and activists. It was repeatedly raided by the police, on grounds of drug possession, despite a lack of evidence. In response the black community staged a protest, on 9 August 1970, where 150 people marched to the local police station. Violence between police and protesters led to a series of arrests and after considering a variety of options, including inciting racial hatred under the Race Relations Act and deportation under new immigration rules, they were tried for incitement to riot. The case was thrown out by the presiding magistrate, who found that evidence from 12 police officers showed they equated black radicalism with criminal intent,[3] but the Director of Public Prosecutions reinstated the charges and the Mangrove Nine were re-arrested in a series of dawn raids.

List of the Mangrove Nine

1. Barbara Beese
2. Rupert Boyce
3. Frank Crichlow
4. Rhodan Gordon
5. Darcus Howe
6. Anthony Innis
7. Altheia Jones-LeCointe
8. Rothwell Kentish
9. Godfrey Millett

Trial

In a departure from previous British Black Power trials, the accused decided not to adopt traditional legal tactics. First, two of them, Jones-LeCointe and Howe, opted to defend themselves. A second novelty was a demand for the trial to be heard by an all-black jury, a tactic they borrowed from trials in the United States where American Black Power activists had cited the 14th Amendment granting equal protection under the law.[3] In the present case, the claim was based on rights enshrined in Magna Carta to a trial by one's peers. This argument was not accepted. However, after rejecting a total of 63 candidate jurors the defendants did finally ensure that two of the 12 jurors were black. By asking candidates what they understood by the term "black power", the defendants placed their own political stamp on what were judicial proceedings. As evidence emerged, the case turned attention on allegations of brutality and racism in the Metropolitan Police. After a trial lasting 55 days, and jury deliberation of more than eight hours, all were cleared of the main charge: inciting a riot.[4]

Significance

In his summing up, the judge said the trial had "regrettably shown evidence of racial hatred on both sides", a statement the Metropolitan Police attempted, unsuccessfully, to have withdrawn.[3] The trial was highly significant in being the first judicial acknowledgement of racial prejudice in the Metropolitan Police, and it inspired other civil rights activists seeking to take on the legal establishment. It also resulted in the government "modernising" procedures related to the empanelling of juries.[3]

References

1. "Black Britannia: Today's Anti-Racist Movement Must Remember Britain's Black Radical History". Novara Media. Retrieved 9 August 2020.
2. Bunce, Robin; Paul Field (29 November 2010). "Mangrove Nine: the court challenge against police racism in Notting Hill". The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 25 October 2017.
3. Bunce, Robin (1 December 2010). "Landmark Court Case Against Police Racism". Diverse Magazine. Retrieved 28 April 2018.
4. "Black Britannia: Today's Anti-Racist Movement Must Remember Britain's Black Radical History". Novara Media. Retrieved 9 August 2020.