Two defendants acquitted of abortion clinic Public Spaces Protection Order breach
Two people charged with breaching a Public Spaces Protection Order (PSPO) for allegedly protesting near an abortion clinic have been acquitted of all charges in a ruling handed down by Birmingham Magistrates' Court today (16 February).
Isabel Vaughan-Spruce and Father Sean Gough had been arrested in separate incidents. Both were supported by legal representation from a faith-based legal advocacy organisation named ADF UK.
Birmingham City Council had secured the PSPO for the abortion clinic in September of last year using section 59 of the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014.
The order prohibits protesting issues related to abortion services in the restricted area. "This includes but is not limited to graphic, verbal or written means, prayer or counselling," the order states.
The order also prohibits interfering or attempting to interfere with, harassing, intimidating, or recording or photographing a service user, visitor or member of staff of the abortion clinic.
Video of Vaughan-Spruce's arrest shows her standing in the restricted area with her hands in her pockets. When asked why she is standing on the pavement by an officer, she says she is not protesting.
The officer then asks if she is praying to which Vaughan-Spruce replies: "I might be praying in my head".
She was arrested and later charged on four counts for breaking the PSPO.
Gough was arrested on a separate occasion for allegedly praying outside the same abortion facility while carrying a sign reading "praying for free speech".
He was charged with "intimidating service-users" of the abortion facility. He was also charged with parking his car, which had an "unborn lives matter" bumper sticker, in the area.
Gough and Vaughan-Spruce's arrests both took place at times when the abortion clinic was closed.
In each case, the Crown Prosecution Service dropped charges due to "insufficient evidence" but also made clear that the charges "may well start again" in the near future subject to further evidential review.
The pair subsequently sought legal action to be sure the charges could not resurface.
According to a report by leading legal journalist Joshua Rozenberg, lawyers representing the pair deployed a power in section 23(7) of the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985, which says: "Where the [Director of Public Prosecutions] has given notice under subsection (3) above [which permits discontinuance], the accused shall, if he wants the proceedings to continue, give notice to that effect to the designated officer for the court within the prescribed period; and where notice is so given the proceedings shall continue as if no notice had been given by the Director under subsection (3) above."
Rozenberg reported that their representation said the defendants gave notice within the time limit and that both said only a court could provide the clarity they were seeking.
Reacting to the acquittal, Vaughan-Spruce said: "I'm glad I've been vindicated of any wrongdoing. But I should never have been arrested for my thoughts and treated like a criminal simply for silently praying on a public street."
Adam Carey
