Both the leader, Mr. Paul Golding, and the deputy leader, Ms. Jayda Fransen, of Britain First have been found guilty of religiously aggravated conduct by Folkestone Magistrates’ Court.

The charges levied against the pair related to the same incidents with three of the four charges levied against Ms. Fransen also being levied against Mr. Golding.

Mr. Golding has been found guilty of one of the three religious harassment charges placed against him and Ms Fransen has been found guilty of three of the four religious harassment charges placed against her.

The pair were initially arrested in May 2017 over the distribution of leaflets and online posting of videos during a rape trial at Canterbury Crown Court, Kent in 2017.

The first charge levied against both related to the pair’s visit to 555 Pizza – the shop below the apartment where the incident associated with the rape trial occurred.

The pair demanded that Mr. Tamin Rahmani – one of the men convicted in the rape trial at Canterbury Crown Court – come out of the shop and speak to them. However, Mr. Rahmani was not present, and only his wife and children were in the building.

The incident was found to be greatly distressing to Mr. Rahmani’s wife and left the young girls “crying”.

Both Mr. Golding and Ms. Fransen were found guilty of this charge.

The second charge levied against both related to the misidentification of Mr. Faiz Rahmani – the brother of Mr. Tamin Rahmani – outside Canterbury Crown Court as one of the other defendants of the rape trial at the court.

Judge Justin Barron found them both not guilty of religious harassment but noted that their conduct was “bound to be disruptive, and not in my judgement, anything that could be described as legitimate journalistic activity”.

The third charge related to their distribution of leaflets which again incorrectly identified Mr. Faiz Rahmani as one of the other defendants in the rape trial.

Judge Barron said: “I accept Mr. Faiz Rahmani’s evidence that it caused him harassment, alarm or distress to the extent that he was scared and panicking because people would not know that he was not the defendant in the rape trial”.

Whilst Mr. Golding was not found guilty, a guilty verdict was levied against Ms. Fransen. The judge said: “I find it entirely plausible that Fransen had sufficient autonomy to edit and upload the videos without Mr. Golding seeing them, being involved in their production or giving permission for the upload”.

The fourth charge was against only Ms. Fransen and was in regards to her visit to the house of Mr. Tamin Rahmani.

At the time Mr. Rahmani was not at his house, but his, then pregnant, wife and children were inside.

The wife of Mr. Rahmani, Ms. Kelly Best, reported that Ms. Fransen made horrifically racist remarks: “Dirty Muslim rapist, come out, we’re not going to leave until you’re gone, come out. Dirty scumbugs”.

Judge Barron said: “I am sure that when Ms. Fransen attended at the address she intended to cause harassment, alarm or distress to Mr. Tamin Rahmani. In my judgement, her actions and words in the video are threatening, abusive or insulting and that Ms. Best and her children were caused harassment, alarm, and distress as a direct result. I find the offence religiously aggravated”.

Judge Barron summarised: “I am sure that when Ms. Fransen and Mr. Golding decided to come to Kent, their reason was not because four men were on trial for the rape of a 16 year old…The reason for their decision was the men included Muslim immigrants. I have no doubt it was the joint intention to use the case for their own needs”.

Mr. Golding was sentenced to 18 weeks in prison and Ms. Fransen was sented to 36 weeks in prison.

This is not the first time that Ms. Fransen has been convicted of a religiously aggravated offence. In January 2016 in an incident involving Britain First’s Christian patrol where she was found guilty of hurling religiously aggravated abuse at a Muslim woman wearing her hijab in front of her four young children.

She was fined nearly £2,000 at Luton and South Bedfordshire Magistrates’ Court.