1971 | An unfair trial

Investigation

The trial would not have happened if it were not for 18 year old police cadet Gary Galvin. Despite the risk of retaliation from his co-workers, Galvin made the moral choice to report information linking Geoffrey Ellerker and Kenneth Kitching to Oluwale’s death. In November 1970, officers from Scotland Yard were sent to Leeds to investigate.

The investigation gradually revealed the horrifying extent of David Oluwale’s abuse and torment. Interviews with other officers suggested a campaign of harassment during the last two years of his life. Kitching admitted being physically rough with Oluwale, claiming that he only did so to rid his area of a vagrant. He defended his actions by describing Oluwale as a ‘wild animal, not a human being’. Ellerker, who was serving an unconnected prison sentence for perjury, claimed he never used more force on Oluwale than was required.

Crucial evidence was provided from a bus conductor, David Condon, who was working the night of David Oluwale’s death and had seen two policemen chasing a man just off Call Lane near the River Aire. Out of all the officers in the Leeds police force, only Ellerker and Kitching could not prove their whereabouts at the time.

Detective Chief Superintendent John Perkins, who led the investigation, was convinced that Ellerker and Kitching had chased David Oluwale to his death. His final report said ‘By their horrible actions they have brought shame and discredit on an honourable and hardworking force’ (Aspden, 2007, p. 124).

Trial

Geoffrey Ellerker and Kenneth Kitching were put on trial for the manslaughter of David Oluwale in November 1971. Both officers denied the charges against them.

It was clear from the outset that the odds were stacked in favour of the two officers. The evidence connecting them to David Oluwale’s death was circumstantial as none of the people involved in the chase witnessed by the bus conductor could be identified. The trial instead focused on the character of those involved.

David Oluwale was presented in almost entirely negative way. The prosecution believed the jury was never likely to be sympathetic and presented him as a caricature. John Cobb QC said Oluwale was ‘a nuisance’ and was misquoted as agreeing with the defence’s view of him. The Yorkshire Evening Post omitted a rhetorical question to report that Cobb had stated he was ‘a 38-year old dosser, mentally defective, violent, dirty, awkward, cunning’ (Yorkshire Evening Post, 22 Nov 1971, p. 5).

The defence went further, describing Kitching as an ‘old-fashioned bobby’ and denying that Oluwale should be seen as a citizen of Leeds. Basil Wigoder, defending Ellerker, said ‘What right have we to call him a citizen? His only claim to being a citizen was that now and again he was lodged in the local prison’ (The Times, 23 Nov 1971, p. 4). The fact Oluwale was a British citizen did not seem to matter.

The judge also expressed prejudiced views towards Oluwale, describing him as ‘a dirty, filthy, violent vagrant’, a ‘menace to society’ and ‘a frightening apparition to come across at night’ (Aspden, 2007, p. 221)

Mid-way through the trial, the manslaughter charge was thrown out by the Judge due to the lack of concrete evidence. Ellerker was eventually found guilty of three assaults and sentenced to three years in prison. Kitching was found guilty of two assaults and sentenced to 27 months. They were the only successful prosecutions of British police officers for the involvement in the death of a black person until the 2021 conviction of Benjamin Monk for the manslaughter of the former Aston Villa footballer Dalian Atkinson.

Media coverage

The trial of Ellerker and Kitching was widely reported in both local and national newspapers. Most of these reports painted David Oluwale in a negative light, adopting discriminatory language and stripping him of his character and humanity.

This process can even be seen when it comes to naming those involved. Ellerker and Kitching’s full names were used in every report of the trial, but David Oluwale was often described merely as a ‘coloured vagrant’ or a ‘lame darkie’. This dehumanising language suggests that newspaper editors had little respect for Oluwale despite the possibility that he had been unlawfully killed.

As students working on a previous project on this subject have said, the police were better treated. Some newspapers implied that the trial was a set up against the officers and the Yorkshire Evening Post argued against a public inquiry because they thought it would ‘provide an opportunity for “malicious accusers” to attack the police’ (Aspden, 2007, p. 224).

Because newspapers were only reporting what was said in court, their stories were padded out with direct quotes from the accused officers and often repeated the accusation that Oluwale was the original aggressor.

The only real exception was an article by Ron Phillips in the magazine Race Today in January 1972. This magazine was published by the Institute of Race Relations in London, a progressive think-tank. The article set the trial in context by telling the story of David Oluwale’s life for the first time and connecting his case to other examples of police misconduct. Phillips argued that Oluwale’s death stemmed from the racialised belief that black people were a threat to British society (Phillips, 1972).

Ron Phillips’ article would inspire some of the first memorials to David Oluwale’s life. But the dominant reports of the trial failed to portray him fairly. David Oluwale deserved more justice.