An Ultimate Fighting Championship announcer grabbed a 14-year-old schoolboy by the neck after a Lime Bike was knocked over, blocking the pavement outside his £1.6million home.
Sports entrepreneur Andrew Friedlander, 51, was told by a Judge: ‘It was not for you to act as the local vigilante to hold them to account’ after he was convicted of grabbing the teen.
The £100,00 a year founder of ‘The Sports Presentation Company’ fought the charge, claiming he was acting in his civic duty and found himself surrounded by nearly a dozen teenagers.
He was convicted of assaulting the schoolboy outside the family home he shares with his wife and 17-year-old daughter on Hertford Avenue, East Sheen on November 25 last year.
The University of South Wales graduate was fined £2,500, with £650 costs and ordered to pay £250 compensation to the victim, plus a £1,000 victim surcharge.
He was the UFC’s UK/Europe live announcer, introducing mixed martial arts fighters into the Octagon before joining the presenting team at Cage Warriors.
Prosecutor Catherine van Zeeland told Wimbledon Magistrates’ Court: ‘There was use of substantial force and possible strangulation against a vulnerable victim, due to their age.’
The area outside Friedlander’s smart semi-detached home had become an unofficial docking bay for the cycle hire scheme and large numbers of Lime Bikes were routinely scattered in the immediate vicinity of his property.
He told the court: ‘I was working in my office at the front of my house and there was a loud crunching sound and I saw a Lime Bike blocking the pavement and my intention was to unblock the pavement.
‘I was curious as to what happened as I’ve seen disturbances out there before.
‘I thought: ”Someone needs to pick up that bike”, and there were a dozen or more school kids spread out.
‘The bike was blocking the pavement and I was like: ”Lads, you know, let’s pick the bike up”, and there was immediate denial: ”It weren’t us.”
‘I tried to appeal to their better nature and said: ”C’mon lads, let’s pick up the bike”, and there was a holding of ground and a flat denial of: ”It weren’t us mate.”
‘There was a group of them and the height difference isn’t much so it became a bit more tense.
‘Now all of a sudden I’m outnumbered in a different situation.
‘I’m not an aggressive front foot type of guy, but felt there should be some authority and said: ”C’mon, pick up the f***ing bike.”
‘I’m in a pair of slippers, surrounded by a group of teenagers. I have no knowledge of who they are and they were a similar size to me.
‘I did the countdown to three and my assumption was people would disperse.
‘I started thinking: ”Oh s***,’ what’s the next thing here?”
‘No-one was budging and I was concerned I was outnumbered. I took hold of one boy by the material of his collar and moved him towards the bike.
‘We picked up the bike together and a bit sarcastically, with my adrenalin up I said: ”Thanks.”
‘It was probably a strong grip. I am not someone who is aggressive, but it felt like the thing to do to remove myself from the group.
‘There was no intention to hurt or injure.’
However, the victim gave an account of a far more aggressive Friedlander as he gave evidence from behind a screen.
The teen told the trial: ‘A person approached me from behind and said: ”Who knocked over the Lime Bike? If you don’t pick it up I’m going to smash your face through this fence and drag you to my door.”
‘I was nervous and shocked and he counted down from three and when he reached one he grabbed my neck and dragged me to the Lime Bike and made me pick it up.’
The schoolboy conceded he may have caught the Lime Bike, which was leaning against a tree, with the blazer of his uniform as he walked past, accidentally knocking it over.
‘It was seven steps to the Lime Bike. He was ahead of me and pulling me and I was a bit sore afterwards, there were marks and a scratch on my neck.
‘I picked it up, worried I would be assaulted again.’
When he got home his mother took an image of a scratch and small nick to his neck, which he says was caused by the defendant.
When cross-examined by Friedlander’s lawyer Erin McKee the schoolboy said: ‘It’s not like I pulled the bike, it just fell. I didn’t see it as a problem, I’ve often seen Lime Bikes on the ground.’
His 14-year-old friend told the court: ‘As we walked past the Lime Bike it fell over and a man started asking questions about who knocked over the bike.
‘He said: ”If you don’t pick up the bike I’m going to slam your heads through my front door,” and started counting down from three.
‘He grabbed my friend by his neck and dragged him over to the bike.’
When cross-examined Friedlander said: ‘I wanted to place some responsibility on people walking past my house. I felt a civic responsibility.
‘They are children, but they are also teenagers and there was a lot of them. They were behind me, in front of me and to my left.
‘In the moment I felt surrounded. I was by myself in an unexpected situation, not primed for battle in my slippers and a group of young men not backing down, not budging. I was outnumbered.
‘I grabbed the material on his shirt and blazer. I can’t be sure there wasn’t skin when I put my finger and thumb together.
‘It was force to move away from a potentially volatile situation.
‘It is possible in that moment a finger caught his neck, but it wasn’t intentional.
‘I am not unaware young people in London carry knives and at that age there is a pack mentality and if one of them said: ”Let’s go,” they would have all followed.
‘The physical threat was something I was more than conscious of.’
District Judge Sushil Kumar announced: ‘Mr Friedlander said in his evidence he needed to ”escalate or assert” and that ”a bit of authority was needed”.
‘I couldn’t understand this approach. This did not support his assertion that he was in fear of the children and taking one boy by the collar was more likely to escalate the situation.
‘This was not the behaviour of someone in fear. He was not acting in fear or self-defence.
‘If he was in fear of violence his action of turning his back on the boys and heading home is puzzling.
‘He was irked by perceived disrespect in an area he cared about and this local resident resorted to vulgarity and made a threat to smash or slam and then grabbed the boy around the throat.
‘His actions were not in self-defence and parts of his evidence were deliberately untruthful.’
Miss McKee told the court: ‘His references reflect his standing in the community and he has been running his business for fourteen years, supports his family and his behaviour is usually calm and placid.
‘It is the first time he has come into contact with the criminal justice system and this conviction will be a heavy burden on him as he frequently travels to the USA.
‘He has expressed a great deal of hindsight and acknowledges that he could have handled this differently.’
Sentencing a clearly unhappy Friedlander, Judge Kumar told him: ‘This conviction follows compelling evidence. It was not for you to act as the local vigilante to hold them to account.
‘As soon as you lay hands on somebody potentially vulnerable there is risk of additional harm and those injuries, that small nick was caused by the incident.
‘The greater punishment will be the loss of your good character. You will not wear that lightly in your business and your travel and that is a significant punishment.
‘This offence was an aberration and there has been no repeat of this concerning behaviour since.’