Met Police officer in court charged with membership of banned neo-Nazi group
search

The latest Jewish News

Read this week’s digital edition

Click Here

Met Police officer in court charged with membership of banned neo-Nazi group

Benjamin Hannam is accused of being in outlawed far-right group National Action, in addition to lying on his police application and possessing an indecent image of a child

Benjamin Hannam, 22, of Enfield, north London (Jonathan Brady/PA Wire)
Benjamin Hannam, 22, of Enfield, north London (Jonathan Brady/PA Wire)

A probationary Metropolitan Police officer has appeared in court charged with being a member of the banned neo-Nazi group National Action.

Benjamin Hannam, 22, of Enfield, north London, is also accused of lying on his police application and vetting forms, saying he was not a member of the extreme organisation, which was outlawed under terrorism legislation in December 2016.

He is further accused of possessing an indecent image of a child as well as a prohibited image of a child, Westminster Magistrates’ Court heard on Thursday.

Hannam, who appeared in court dressed in a light-brown three-piece suit, gave no indication of his pleas.

He was bailed to appear at the Old Bailey for his next appearance on August 14 by deputy chief magistrate Tan Ikram.

Hannam was charged last month following an investigation by the Met’s Counter Terrorism Command and has been suspended from duty, Scotland Yard said.

He is charged with belonging to or professing to belong to a proscribed organisation, namely National Action, contrary to section 11 of the Terrorism Act 2000, between December 2016 and January 2018.

The 22-year-old is also accused of two counts of fraud by false representation in relation to his police application and vetting forms.

It is alleged that he falsely represented that he had not been a member of an organisation similar to the BNP, namely National Action, intending to make gain for himself, contrary to section 1 and 2 of the Fraud Act 2006.

He is also accused of possessing an indecent photograph of a child, contrary to section 160 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988, as well as having a prohibited image of a child, contrary to section 62 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009.

read more:
comments