Information on the Satpal Campaign

*thanks loads to the Free Satpal Campaign for this info*

"The Free Satpal Campaign" has been running for several years. Satpal has been in prison for over thirteen years now. He was the victim of a particularly vicious racist attack and that in the course of defending himself one of his attackers died. We urge you to read the information below which outlines some of the important issues surrounding Satpal’s plight.

THE INCIDENT

On 16th November 1986 Mr Ram was enjoying a meal after work with friends in the Bengali-owned "Sky Blue Restaurant" on Lozells Road in Birmingham. As Mr Ram was ordering his meal, another customer, a Mr Clarke Pearce who was also at the restaurant with a group of white friends, began to shout racist abuse at the waiters with regard to the Asian music being played in the restaurant. Mr Pearce and his party of friends made such remarks as "We don’t want no Paki-Wog music" and "Black crap." Mr Ram retorted by saying, "Leave it on, it’s chart music!" Mr Pearce and his party of friends continued to hurl racist abuse at the waiters and at Satpal himself.

Mr Pearce then got up from his table brandishing a wine glass with which he then lunged at Mr Ram. Frightened and in fear for his life, Mr Ram produced a pen knife which he used in his job as a packer at a factory and warned Mr Pearce that he should not come any closer. Mr Pearce ignored Mr Ram and lurched forward at him with the wine glass cutting Mr Ram’s face and arm in the process. During the attack that followed, Mr Pearce received two knife wounds to his back. Satpal and his friends then left the restaurant not realising how seriously Mr Pearce had been hurt since he was still shouting racist abuse at Mr Ram as he left.

Mr Pearce was later taken to hospital where he initially refused treatment from the casualty staff. He was eventually treated but the knife wound, having punctured his lung, meant that he later died of the injury. During the days that followed Mr Pearce’s death there was inevitably grief and anger surrounding the events that had led to that death. The family and friends of Mr Pearce were very keen to find the man who they believed had murdered him and this was widely publicised in the local media. Many in the Asian community felt that a ‘lynch mob,’ who wanted to ‘get’ someone for Mr Pearce’s death, had formed. During this time Mr Ram had been staying at a friend’s house in fear and shock after he realised that Mr Pearce had died. A few days later Mr Ram contacted a solicitor and agreed to go to the police station to discuss the incident.

The above is as full and detailed an account as far as we can ascertain. It has been collated from the original court transcripts and Satpal’s own account of the incident. We believe that it is imperative to clarify the incident in such detail. Just as information relating to the specific events surrounding the murder of Stephen Lawrence (some of which only came to light five years after his death) was misleading and confused, there have been many rumours and conflicting reports which have clouded the true nature of events with regard to the attack on Satpal. We wish to stress the fact that this was an unprovoked racial attack and that Satpal’s actions were purely in self defence.

THE TRIAL

Mr Ram received an unfair and biased trial at the hands of the British Judicial System. There are several points that clearly illustrate this.

1. Primarily, Satpal was ill advised by his own counsel in the one forty minute conference he had just one hour before the actual trial began. Although Satpal’s solicitors, in their brief to counsel, put forward that his case was clearly one of self defence, which is no crime at all, counsel advised him to put forward a plea of provocation; a defence which reduces murder to manslaughter. The essence of this defence is that a person loses self-control due to the words or behaviour of another and kills deliberately under the effect of this loss of self-control. Satpal did not say that he had lost his self-control nor did he ever say that he had killed deliberately. His counsel also advised that he should not give evidence in his own defence which meant that the jury never actually heard Mr Ram’s account of events. Mr Ram, having no knowledge of the law himself and feeling that his counsel were acting in his own best interests, agreed to their advice.

2.The jury was an ‘all-white’ jury. That is not to say that each individual member of the jury was biased but this case had been portrayed in the media as a black against white issue.

3.The witnesses who gave evidence in defence of Satpal were Bengali speaking waiters whose use of the English language was limited to the general ordering of meals at their restaurant. No interpreter was provided for these witnesses and in fact the judge, Mr Justice Ognall, declared that he himself would act as interpreter even though he did not speak a word of Bengali. A waiter who had witnessed the incident, a student who had spoken English all of his life, was not invited to give evidence.

4.The judge asked the jury to consider a verdict of murder as opposed to provocation upon Mr Ram, stating that Mr Ram had been in his ‘right mind’ when Mr Pearce received the knife wounds, without placing the incident in it’s true context which was that Mr Ram had been acting in self-defence during in an attack which was initiated by Mr Pearce.

5.The judge strongly recommended that the jury seriously consider that the evidence given by one of the friends who was with Mr Ram on the night of the attack was most biased in favour of Mr Ram. He did not recommend so vehemently that this factor be taken into account with regard to the testimony of Mr Pearce’s fiancée who had also been involved, along with the rest of Pearce’s friends, in the racist abuse directed at the restaurant staff.

Mr Ram was subsequently found guilty and convicted of murder by the jury and sentenced to life imprisonment by Justice Ognall with a recommended tariff of 11 years.

THE CURRENT SITUATION

Mr Ram has now been in prison for over 13 years. We believe that his parole hearings have been systematically sabotaged by prison officers and that he has suffered inhuman indignities at the hands of the Prison and the Judicial System. He has been moved from prison to prison during his sentence; having now been in most British prisons and moved over sixty times. He has been subjected to lengthy periods of solitary confinement; in one instance his crime for this punishment was no more than to keep a box of vegetables near his cell door for which he was accused of purposeful obstruction.

Mr Ram has vehemently appealed against his own conviction and that of others who he feels have been wrongfully imprisoned including The Birmingham Six, The Guilford Four, Winston Silcott and The M25 Three. He has also campaigned for better conditions in prisons and has protested at the all too regular episodes of ‘Squat Searching’ (anal searches) which have been carried out on himself and his fellow inmates. Mr Ram has been skilful in his protestations; contacting the press, his campaign and supporters and writing letters to the governors of the various prisons in which he has been an inmate. He has used the correct channels to complain and campaign for decent conditions. It is for these reasons that Mr Satpal Ram, in the eyes of many people, including the media and, we are sure, the prison system, has become a political prisoner.
After the many attacks that Mr Ram has suffered, often surprisingly just a few weeks before his parole hearings, and the many many prisons he has been sent to, one cannot help but come to the conclusion that he is being silenced and that, frightened at the public outcry that may come about by Mr Ram’s protestations, the judiciary are attempting to ‘lose’ Mr Ram within the prison system. Thankfully, Mr Ram’s campaign for justice grows stronger by the day as does the media interest and public awareness of his case.
Satpal’s campaign has now been taken up by individuals and organisations across the world. In the UK Satpal has support from Chris Mullen MP, John McDonnell MP, Keith Vaz MP, Pauline Green MEP as well as The Campaign Group of MPs, Trevor Phillips, Liz Davies (Member of the NEC Labour Party,) the Parliamentary Panjab Human Rights Group and Alan McGee. High profile musicians such as Asian Dub Foundation, Primal Scream, Massive Attack and Chumbawumba have been publicising Satpal’s plight whenever they have had the opportunity.
http://www.asiandubfoundation.com/satpal or http://www.appleonline.net/satpal

NEW DEVELOPMENTS

1.The Free Satpal Campaign is currently collating new evidence and has also located an important eyewitness who hitherto has not had the opportunity to relate his view of events describing the original incident.

2.Gareth Peirce, the high profile civil rights lawyer, has now taken on Satpal’s case.

3.Satpal's lawyers have presented a dossier to the Criminal Cases Review Commission, arguing that his conviction was unsafe and unjust. |If the CCRC agree, they will refer Satpal's case back to the Court of Appeal. A decision is expected in October 2000.

4.Satpal has submitted a new application for Parole which is expected to be decided upon in October 2000.

5.Due to the successful public protestations and the persistent letter-writing campaign by groups and individuals from all over the world with regard to the prison conditions that Satpal has endured, (i.e. continuous periods of solitary confinement and lack of basic amenities in his cell) Satpal, now in his 62nd prison transfer, is currently out of isolation and back on the main wing at HMP Full Sutton, York.

6.Already well over ten thousand people have signed the petition supporting Satpal Ram and the campaign plans to submit them to the Home Office for the attention of Jack Straw MP.

In our opinion Mr Ram received an unfair and biased trial and has now become a political victim of the British Judicial System; having suffered greatly because his own sense of justice has not allowed him to ‘quietly’ accept the abuse he and other prisoners suffer on a daily basis. We invite you to consider all of these factors and to investigate the circumstances that surround Mr Ram’s case. We strongly refute any allegations made by the Prison Authorities that Satpal is a ‘violent’ prisoner; the justification that they give for continuing his incarceration.

Thank you for taking the time to read this long and detailed report. If you would like further information and/or direct contact with key representatives from the Free Satpal Campaign please do not hesitate to contact us our details are on the campaign leaflet.

Free Satpal Campaign (London)