Kill the Bill rioter found guilty of setting police vehicles alight
Ryan Roberts, who's 25, said in his defence that he got "carried away"
Last updated 29th Oct 2021
A man who took part in Bristol's Kill the Bill riot last March has been found guilty of trying to endanger the life of a police officer.
Ryan Roberts. who's 25, was caught on camera trying to set a police van on fire during the unrest on 21 March.
WATCH: Our video report on the riot, recorded on 22 March
During a trial at Bristol Crown Court the jury heard he also led chants of ACAB: All cops are bastards" outside Bridewell Police Station.
He threw cans and bottles at officers and allegedly verbally abused them, kicked them and smashed in the police station windows.
Footage from the riot showed Roberts pushing pieces of flaming cardboard under two police vans, and placing industrial bins around an already partially burnt-out police car and setting them alight.
It was claimed he told an officer inside one of the vans he would "go bang".
Roberts then allegedly smashed in the windows of a mobile police station and encouraged the crowd to help roll it over, before setting light to the cab while hundreds of people were close by.
Today Roberts has been convicted of one count of attempted arson with intent to endanger life and one count of attempted arson being reckless as to whether life was endangered for trying to set light to two police vans.
Two alternative counts of attempted arson were left to lie on the court file, while Roberts was further convicted of arson being reckless as to whether life was endangered for setting light to the police car.
Roberts was found guilty of riot, while he was convicted of one count of arson being reckless as to whether life was endangered in respect of the torching of a mobile police station, by a majority verdict of 10 to two.
In his evidence, Roberts said he got "carried away" fighting for freedom of speech.
The afternoon began with a protest against the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill which is going through Parliament.
Roberts told the court the Bill aimed to "ban peaceful protest altogether", saying the demo "was more about freedom of speech".
He claimed the mood of the protest only changed when police donned riot gear as it got dark.
The defendant said officers started pushing the crowd back to create "a sterile environment" around Bridewell police station.
"I hadn't seen the crowd doing anything before that point," Roberts added.
He said police started "pushing, shoving and hitting" the crowd with shields and batons.
"I was fighting for a cause I felt strongly about," Roberts said.
Asked about footage of him apparently kicking a police officer's shield and smashing the windows of the police station, Roberts replied: "I was just getting carried away in the moment."
Forty-four officers were injured in the riot, which died down in the early hours of March 22.
Avon and Somerset Police initially claimed two of their officers suffered broken bones while being assaulted but later retracted that and apologised saying it wasn't the case.
Katheryn Hobbs, a legal observer trained to monitor police behaviour and advise protesters during demonstrations, said she witnessed multiple incidents of police violence on March 21.
Ms Hobbs said that after walking with protesters through the city, there was a "sharp escalation" in policing tactics when officers began to line up outside the police station.
She said she had witnessed officers "shoving, kicking, hitting, pulling and pushing the crowd back".
Ms Hobbs said she gave first aid to 25 or 30 people during the evening, many of whom had been pepper sprayed, while others had cuts and bruises.
She said she saw multiple incidents of "blading" by police, when an officer brings the sharp edge of a riot shield down on a protester.
"I certainly witnessed police officers doing that to several people seated on the floor, which is extremely dangerous."
The jury have been given a majority direction on the remaining charges of riot and arson, meaning the judge can accept a verdict based on the decision of 10 jurors against two or 11 against one.