Bradley McCarthy was arrested for shouting vile racist abuse at counter-protesters, de-arrested and then rejoined the mob confronting police

A man has been jailed for 20 months for his part in the disorder in Castle Park in Bristol on August 3, after a judge heard he shouted racist abuse at counter-protesters and confronted police officers and a police dog.

Bradley McCarthy was ‘at the forefront’ of the disorder in Castle Park and at Bristol Bridge, and was actually arrested by police for a breach of the peace, before being de-arrested. But instead of leaving the area, he went back and joined the mob and was among the crowd of far-right protesters who clashed with police near Bristol Bridge.

The 34-year-old from Gerrard Close in Inns Court, Knowle West, told police he attended what he claimed he thought was a protest about children being stabbed, but the sentencing judge HH Lambert told him he was part of an ‘extremist anti-immigration protest’, sparked by ‘right-wing extremists and racists’, who have been ‘intent on provoking violence directed at innocent people and the police’.

McCarthy pleaded guilty to a charge of violent disorder and the court was shown video footage of three occasions where he was captured on film during that evening. In one clip shown to the court, he approached the police line separating the side McCarthy was on from counter protesters in Castle Park, and shouted abuse at them. He called one counter-protester a ‘P** c**’, threatened to ‘write the face off’ another, and repeatedly goaded others to cross the police lines to ‘effectively fight one on one’.

He was then arrested for a public order offence at 7.09pm – a moment captured extensively on camera by Bristol Live, but was then de-arrested. Then, by 8.09pm, he had rejoined the crowd and was part of a mob confronting police as they were being told to go over to the Redcliffe side of Bristol Bridge. He shouted at police and even barked in the face of a police dog.

An Instagram reel video was also shown to the court, which showed McCarthy clashing with counter-protesters.

Defending, Robin Rollins submitted a large number of character references in support of McCarthy, from people who said he was ‘not bigoted or prejudiced’, and was part of a charitable organisation that had donated to a Sikh community centre and temple. Judge Lambert said these references and statements were ‘impressive’.

Mr Rollins conceded McCarthy had 22 previous convictions for 43 offences dating back years, including a racially-aggravated public order offence in 2011. But he had not been convicted of any offence since 2019, after he began taking care of what is now a step-daughter and two daughters.

Mr Rollins said that a few weeks before the August 3 disturbance, he had come to the aid of a person who had tried to take their own life, and the incident had deeply affected him in a traumatic way. “He attended the event in Castle Park, he didn’t intend or want there to be violence, but he lost all sense of himself and is deeply, deeply ashamed,” he said.

Explaining why he continued to be at the forefront of the disorder, Mr Rollins said he had parked his car at the Asda in Bedminster and was trying to get back to it.

Sentencing him, His Honour Judge Julian Lambert said McCarthy had a long history of violent offences, but conceded he had not been significantly violent at all on the day on August 3.

“You have 22 court appearances for a total of 43 offences. Amongst these I saw offences against the person, weapons offences, public order offences and frequent defiance of court orders. You have been committed for sentence for an offence of violent disorder,” said

“This involves unrest that has arisen recently in many parts of the country. The unrest has been fuelled by misinformation circulating largely on social media. Right wing extremists and racists have been intent on provoking violence directed at innocent people and the police whose role it is to protect us all.

The disorder has been serious and widespread. In particular refugees and asylum seekers have been targeted, as have some of the premises where they are housed whilst being processed by the Home Office. On Saturday, August 3, 2024, you chose to attend an extremist anti-immigration protest that began in Castle Park here in Bristol. Some elements of the protest, moved across Bristol Bridge and on to the Mercure Hotel. You were last identified in the vicinity of Bristol Bridge.

“You are shown on video as part of the crowd in Castle Park. Those with whom you were standing, trying to goad the police, were verbally and physically aggressive expressing racist sentiments. The aggression was directed towards the police who were trying to control the situation.

“You were a part of that, standing within a large confrontational group who were acting in concert, but in particular you chose to direct threats towards police officers. You should never have gone there and should never have remained there. This was no peaceful protest and was never going to be so. It was a violent, ignorant defiance of the law.

“What I saw from you was not the most intense and long lasting threats or violence I have seen in such situations. It was, however, a potential catalyst for yet worse violence. As is often the case it is not the actions of one individual that represents the gravamen of the offence but rather the conduct of all concerned taken together.

“You were seen, first, at 6.50pm at Castle Park. You were highly prominent at the front of your group of protesters, confronting opposing protesters. You were very threatening throughout the time you remained at Castle Park, joining vociferously in loud crowd chanting which threatened members of the opposing protest by calling out “P*** c***s” and threatening to “write your face off”. You were repeatedly inciting opposing protesters to cross a demarcation line enforced by police.

“At around 7.09pm you were still at Castle Park, when you were identified on arrest for breach of the peace. You would have done well to have treated that as the time to leave,” he added. “You chose, however, to remain and were identified as one of the violent crowd at 2010 hours on the Redcliffe side of Bristol Bridge. You were then shouting at officers, including aggressively getting to the level of a dog and shouting in its face for some reason.

“You did all this in a tinderbox atmosphere where it only takes the actions of one person to spark very serious group violence. You should have well understood the potential incendiary effect of your actions,” Judge Lambert added. “The law respects the right of freedom of expression and peaceful protest. It cannot tolerate resort to violence and threats.”

Speaking generally about the disorder in Bristol on August 3, Judge Lambert said the effects on the community had been profound, with people scared to leave their homes.

“There has been coordinated action by extremists to cause violence and by so doing to generate fear throughout the community as a whole,” he said. “It is also a feature of this strategy that the police have been one of the targets for the verbal and physical aggression in which groups of organised agitators have engaged. Where there is widespread disorder, the actions of each participant, whatever they might be in isolation, have the potential to embolden and encourage others to behave in a similar way. The harm to the public stems from the combined effect of what is done by everyone who is present.

“The community impact evidence makes clear the degree of fear that was generated in the community in anticipation of and as a result of this protest. There was a well-founded anticipation that it could become very violent as happened elsewhere,” he said.

“One of the legitimate objectives of sentencing is to protect the public. The courts must impose severe sentences for offences involving or connected with largescale and violent public disorder. Sentences are intended to provide both punishment and individual and general deterrence,” he added.

Following his guilty plea, much of the discussion in the sentencing hearing between prosecutor Emily Evans and defending barrister Robin Rollins was around where McCarthy’s actions sat in the sentencing framework. Ms Evans said it should be positioned at the most serious end of the guidelines, given the racist abuse element to it, while Mr Rollins said that his actions were less serious, given he kept himself away from the counter-protesters and police for most of the time he was there, didn’t throw anything or use violence.

Judge Lambert said he did not need a pre-sentence report – one was requested by the defence – and agreed with Ms Evans that the actions of McCarthy were at the most serious ‘1A’ level of the sentencing guidelines.

“The offence of violent disorder has a maximum penalty of five years imprisonment,” he said. “I must follow the definitive guideline for that offence. I assess that your offending falls within category 1A of the guideline with a starting point of four years and a range of three years to four years six months.

“Most of the potential aggravating factors are the elements that contribute to this categorisation. This was a serious example of an offence coming within the range I have identified. The incident began in a busy public area and there would undoubtedly have been children in and about the park. The offending in general was sustained taking place over a long period of time. The impact on the public has been very substantial with fear engendered in the community and businesses adversely affected. In addition there is the factor of your previous convictions. The offence was aggravated by a racial element and sentence was increased as a consequence.

“There is no pre-sentence report and in my assessment none is required,” the judge added. “Custody is the only appropriate disposal and your advocate has been able to provide the court with all the relevant information about you. There is limited mitigation as identified in the guideline. You have a number of supportive references which show this behaviour to be character for you.

“Your individual role was limited to lower level involvement which reduces sentence considerably and places it at the lower reaches of a category 1A case. On a trial I would have imposed three years imprisonment, one third credit for plea gives two years, further reduction for your partial admissions in interview and having handed yourself in yields 20 months imprisonment. This will not be suspended since the paramount consideration within the imposition guideline is that only an immediate custodial sentence provides appropriate punishment.

“You will serve up to half in custody. As and when you are released you will be on licence for the balance of that term and liable to recall. In the circumstances the only financial order that it is appropriate to make is by way of recording the surcharge that applies,” he added.

As he was led down, McCarthy shrugged to his family in the public gallery and said: “I’ll see you in 10 months then.”

Bristol Post