Hadush Kebatu, an asylum seeker from Ethiopia who was staying at the Bell Hotel in Epping, has been found guilty of two counts of sexual assault, one count of attempted sexual assault, inciting a child into sexual activity, and harassment without violence. Kebatu did not react as he was found guilty at Chelmsford magistrates’ court of all five counts he was charged with, keeping his hand held to his face.
During the proceedings, the court heard that the 38-year-old asylum seeker had approached a group of teenagers and asked a girl back to his room at the hotel to ‘make babies’. The judge told Kebatu the evidence against him was ‘clear and consistent’ and that there was no evidence any of the child witnesses ‘fabricated’ their accounts. He also warned the asylum seeker that he should expect an immediate custodial sentence – ‘it is just a question of how long’. Sentencing has been adjourned until 23 September while a pre-sentence report is put together.
It was Kebatu’s harassment of a teenager in Epping that sparked days of protests outside Essex’s Bell Hotel, where locals turned up with posters reading: ‘Protect our kids’. The demonstrations subsided when the High Court granted a temporary injunction to Epping Forest district council – which required the removal of the 138 migrant residents staying in the hotel within 24 days. Council leaders across the country promptly announced that they too would take similar legal action against migrant hotels in their areas, with nine Labour-led local authorities left considering legal action.
But within a fortnight, the Court of Appeal lifted the temporary injunction. Lord Justice Bean claimed the High Court judge had made a series of errors that ‘undermined his decision’ – including failing to take into account the right of Home Secretary Yvette Cooper to take part in the decision. While government lawyers had warned the initial judgment could have acted as an ‘impetus’ for further violent clashes – and put at risk the system that upholds the legal duty of government ministers to protect asylum seekers – the Court of Appeal decision prompted accusations that the rights of asylum seekers trumped the rights of Epping locals unhappy about the hotels.
One Bell Hotel protestor told journalists at the time that: ‘We’re fearful for our children. This isn’t a racist thing, I don’t care what colour they are. This was a small market town, but everything has changed. People are scared.’ Today’s judgment has vindicated those locals.
Comments