The defendants said their posts were simply “jokes” or dark jokes and called the charges “ridiculous” under a law that criminalizes grossly offensive communications. They tried, and failed, to have the case dismissed in July, and have since denied all charges. Jonathon Cobban, 35, William Neville, 34, and Joel Borders, 45, admitted sending the messages but said they were funny, misinterpreted or did not meet the legal threshold for an offence. On Wednesday, Borders was found guilty of all five charges he faced, Cobban was convicted of three of the five and PC Neville was acquitted of all charges. None of the seven colleagues in the chat had ever raised concerns about the posts, and they were only discovered after team member Wayne Couzens was arrested for kidnapping, raping and murdering Sarah Everard in March 2021. Detectives searching his phone for evidence found he was in a WhatsApp group called ‘Bottle and Stoppers/Atkin’s Puppets’, which included a total of seven armed officers who had been transferred from the Civil Nuclear Constabulary to the Metropolitan Police. “There is no evidence that any of the defendants, or the other members of the group, ‘yelled’ or challenged any of their co-defendants when they received what the prosecution say were offensive messages,” prosecutor Edward Brown. KC said in court. The members were traced and questioned about messages from 2019 that were deemed to reach the criminal threshold of “serious offence”. Cobban, PC Neville and Borders refused to answer questions verbally when interviewed and provided prepared written statements denying any wrongdoing. After they were charged and the case was heard at Westminster Magistrates’ Court, they tried to have it dismissed. On July 29, a judge rejected a request by their defense lawyers to drop the charges. Metropolitan Police officer Jonathon Cobban was convicted of sending offensive messages (PA wire) Defense lawyer Nicholas Yeo had argued that the messages did not meet the legal definition of “grossly offensive” because they were sent to a private chat group where “no one was offended and no one was targeted”. He told the court: “The fact that none of these people [in the WhatsApp group] took these messages seriously or made a complaint about them is a very important factor and we say decisive.” District Judge Sarah Turnock said she considered the “defence application to dismiss” the prosecution on the basis that there was “no case to answer”. But he concluded: “Based on the evidence and the content and context of the messages, I do not accept these comments. “I am satisfied that each of the messages may be grossly offensive within the meaning of the 2003 act.” District Judge Turnock said the fact that the WhatsApp group was private and no one in it made any complaints “does not render him incapable” of breaking the law. He told the court that the legal test was whether they were “grossly offensive” to the people they related to – those from “black and minority ethnic backgrounds, people living in certain areas of London, women, children, disabled people and homosexuals”. – rather than those who received them. The defendants took to the witness box after the motion to dismiss was denied to testify in their defense. Coban told Westminster Magistrates’ Court: “As far as I was concerned, these messages were sent to a private, secure WhatsApp group and I did not expect that they could or would be read by anyone outside that group.” He said that as former officers who guarded sensitive sites they had a “dark sense of humour”, adding: “I meant them to be seen as humorous jokes and nothing more.” Borders, who became a close protection officer after leaving the Metropolitan Police, said the case had “spiraled out of control”. Joel Borders arrives at Westminster Magistrates’ Court (PA Wire) Addressing a female prosecutor, he added: “It is absolutely ridiculous. You are trying to criminalize innocent police officers. You’ve got two really good cops in there who are probably going to lose their jobs over this, just because you’re excluding certain jokes. “People are offended by everything. You need to stop this horribly offensive thing because it is absolutely ridiculous.’ Borders was asked about a message in which he wrote about a female police officer: “She’s going to use me as an example. Lead me and shut me up when I rush her and hit her! Sneaky b****.” He replied: “I was saying he was the type of person who would make false allegations. Rape and beating should have been in quotes. “That’s an exaggerated way of saying she’s not to be trusted … she’s the kind of person who’s really sneaky and devious.” The court was shown conversations that appeared to joke about police performing sexual acts on victims of domestic violence, with Cobban writing: “It’s okay, DV victims love it… that’s why they’re repeat victims most of the time.” When asked about the message in court, the officer said it was “quite obviously sarcastic”. At another point, Coban described an incident in which he had to care for a person who needed hospital treatment after self-injury as “an attention fridge, a self-harming p*c”. He denied targeting the gay community with the comment and said the use of the slur was “non-targeted derogatory branding”. Responding to a colleague’s account of the domestic violence response days later, Borders wrote: “Bet they all had one thing in common. Women who don’t listen.” Priti Patel announces investigation into Sarah Everard’s murder Giving evidence in his own defence, Borders said he was regularly called to domestic abuse incidents and some were “horrendous”, saying the posts were just “stupid comments”. During the same exchange, Cobban referred to a racially diverse area of London as a ‘hole’, described an audience member who asked him for directions as ‘yellow’ and remarked: ‘The shops aren’t in English either. “ The officer denied being racist but admitted the messages were “in very bad taste”. Borders wrote that it “felt like a point in a domino” in London’s Feltham district and described Hounslow as “twinned with Baghdad”. He denied disparaging regions because of their racial diversity and said he described himself as a domino point in a “celebration of diversity.” In April 2019, Borders wrote that he was looking forward to “shooting some in the face” with a police gun, and Coban responded, “Me too. I want to taser a cat and a dog to see who reacts better…same with kids. Zap zap you little groomsmen.’ Borders replied “and some downys?”, in what prosecutors said was a reference to people with Down syndrome. Borders told the court the exchange was “obviously a joke”, adding: “It’s blatantly obvious. I don’t know why this is here [on the indictment]. It is ridiculous.” Coban called himself an “exemplary” police officer at his trial, saying he “conducted himself completely professionally.” “Dark humor has always been a coping mechanism for people doing difficult jobs,” he added. “I recognize these are silly messages.” Borders said he was “really bothered” by the thought of upsetting the public, adding: “I’m going to help people cross the street, I’m going to open doors for people, because that’s who I am.” Borders and Coban will be sentenced on November 2, while Coban and acquitted co-defendant P.K. Neville will face separate disciplinary proceedings as they are still serving officers in the Metropolitan Police. The Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) began investigating the men in April 2021 and found that all three defendants and three other officers in the team had cases to answer for serious misconduct. Borders then abandoned the Metropolitan Police. The officers are accused of breaching police professional conduct standards between March 2019 and October 2019 by sending biased or inappropriate messages and failing to challenge or report inappropriate comments made by others. IOPC regional director Sal Naseem said: “The messages sent by these police officers were inexcusable and particularly worrying given the profession they represent. Social media cannot be a hiding place for such views. “Behavior of this kind seriously undermines public confidence in policing. It is part of our role, and that of the police force itself, to ensure that it is eradicated and those responsible are held to account for their actions.”
