Reading Magistrates' Court: school staff attack each other in Newbury Covid rage incident

TWO school staff members attacked one another in public during a Covid rage row over social distancing.

Startled passers-by, including a toddler, looked on as the defendant’s teenage daughter joined the melee.

In the dock at Reading Magistrates’ Court on Friday, May 13, was Mary-Ann Farley and her daughter Lucy.

Both denied assaulting a woman by beating her outside Newbury Pets At Home store off the London Road on December 30 last year.

The court conceded that 42-year-old Mrs Farley, a kitchen assistant at The Downs School in Compton, was attacked first by the woman, who also works at a school and who had insisted on 3m social distancing, rather than the usual 2m.

However, in an unusual step, the woman persuaded magistrates to grant her lifelong anonymity before she would give evidence and so cannot be identified.

The court heard Mrs Farley and her 19-year-old daughter, who live at The Oaks in Newbury, were standing on a 2m social distancing marker in the store when they were accosted by the woman, who asked them to move back even further.

Later, in the car park outside, CCTV footage showed Mrs Farley approaching the woman, who appeared to elbow her in the ribs.

The pair then grappled and Lucy Farley joined in the struggle.

Lucy Eastwood, prosecuting, described it as “a very sustained assault in front of members of the public, including a toddler.”

Giving evidence, the woman said Mrs Farley had launched an unprovoked attack on her, adding: “It was such a shock. It was such a vicious attack.

“I was just trying to protect myself from the virus.”

She described the incident as “like a pack of hounds cornering their prey”.

Under cross examination by Steve Molloy, representing the Farleys, the woman admitted asking them to move further back in the store, insisting it was her “right” to do so.

She vehemently denied elbowing Mrs Farley in the ribs.

Mrs Farley told the court that the woman’s manner in the store had been so aggressive that a shop assistant had offered to stay with them until they left.

She said that, as she and her daughter walked to their car, the woman was muttering loudly about the incident and so she approached to ask what the problem was.

Mrs Farley said she did not expect the confrontation to turn physical and was shocked to be attacked.

Both she and her daughter insisted they were trying to stop the assault and to defend themselves.

Summing up, Ms Eastwood said the victim had been anxious about a new coronavirus strain.

Mr Molloy said Mrs Farley had simply defended herself – “the camera doesn’t lie” – and that her daughter intervened to protect her mother.

Magistrates convicted both the Farleys, although they conceded that the woman had attacked first and the pair may have feared further violence from her.

Neverthess, they ruled the Farleys’ response was “unreasonable” and went beyond lawful self defence.

Both defendants were made subject to a 12-month conditional discharge, each ordered to pay £387 costs plus a victim services surcharge of £22 and each ordered to pay £100 compensation to the victim.