Rightwing news presenter André Walker has been found guilty of assault after attempting to kick, punch and strangle a climate protester during a pro-Trump gala dinner in Windsor last year.
The Republican Overseas event, held at Windsor Guildhall in September, was disrupted by Fossil Free London protesters Robin Wells and Kush Naker. The pair were protesting US President Donald Trump’s climate policies, chanting, “If you drill, baby, drill, how many will you kill?” before unfurling a banner.
Video footage showed Walker, who organised the event and is a presenter on TalkTV, dragging Naker away from the dinner and into a separate room. In a YouTube video recorded afterwards, Walker referred to the room’s lack of CCTV, grinning and raising his thumbs towards the camera.
A court has now found that Walker attempted to assault Naker after taking him somewhere he was no longer being filmed. Following the guilty verdict at Reading Magistrates’ Court on Thursday, Walker received an 18-month conditional discharge and was ordered to pay £1,200, including £550 in compensation to Naker.
According to the Byline Times, Walker reacted angrily when the verdict was delivered, slamming his palm on the desk and swearing.
Naker, an NHS doctor, described the incident as an example of political violence being used to suppress dissent.
“Using violence to silence free speech is a hallmark of fascism,” he said. “André Walker’s response to hearing us criticise deadly fossil fuel addiction gave us a glimpse of what happens when extreme rightwing populist narratives build their movements on hate.”
Wells also welcomed the verdict, arguing that protesters should retain the same protections and dignity as anyone else.
“This verdict sends an important message that being a protester does not mean surrendering your right to be treated with dignity and respect,” he said.
The activists said Fossil Free London would continue campaigning against politicians, corporations and other powerful interests whose decisions, they argue, are contributing to climate change and putting lives at risk.
The case has highlighted the increasingly bitter confrontations surrounding climate protest, particularly when demonstrations target political events. For campaigners, the verdict represents a warning that political disagreement cannot justify violence. For opponents of disruptive protest, however, the incident is another reminder of the tensions created when activists deliberately interrupt public gatherings.
Regardless of political viewpoint, the court’s ruling establishes a clear boundary: peaceful protest may provoke anger, but it does not remove a protester’s right to protection from assault.
