Skip to content
Bramble

Crime

Two 17-year-olds jailed for 10 years over petrol arson attack on Gants Hill restaurant

Two 17-year-olds were sentenced at the Old Bailey to 10 years' custody plus a three-year extension period for an arson attack on the Indian Aroma restaurant in Gants Hill, in which diners were set alight. The judge said the attack was planned and professional and was probably directed by an unidentified older criminal.

2 outlets · 2L · 0C · 0R First reported Account updated
Image: Daily Mirror
Image: Metro

1 / 2

The story, neutrally told

Left · 2Two 17-year-olds were jailed at the Old Bailey on Friday 2 October over an arson attack on the Indian Aroma restaurant in Gants Hill, east London, in which customers were set on fire. Left · 2They were convicted of arson with intent to endanger life and having a bladed article, and Judge Michael Grieve KC gave each an extended sentence of 10 years' custody with a three-year extended period. Left · 2The court heard the pair, armed with weapons described as machetes, long knives and swords, entered the restaurant at around 9pm on 22 August last year with a third person, who emptied canisters of petrol onto the floor and tables.

Left · 2The group backed out and held the door "mostly shut" while a slip of paper was lit, causing an "explosion"; they then fled in a stolen car, and six London Fire Brigade vehicles attended. Left · 2Prosecutor James Dawes KC said the eight diners were ordered to stay seated and threatened, that each attacker had a separate, well-defined role, and that lighting the petrol while customers were "frozen in terror" guaranteed burns. Left · 2One woman was put in a medically induced coma with her clothing melted to her skin, and had burns to 50% of her body surface, 45% of them full-thickness; her husband, seen running out on fire, had mixed-depth burns to 51% and said he "woke up 45 days after being burnt".

Left · 2Judge Grieve called the attack a "sophisticated and professional operation" with a "high degree" of planning, said the defendants knew the near-inevitable consequence was serious harm up to death, and said he had no doubt they acted on the direction of an older, more experienced criminal who has not been identified. Left · 2The judge said that, having reviewed CCTV, an earlier suggestion that petrol was poured directly onto a customer's back was perhaps "questionable", but that petrol was "liberally spread around" on the chairs where customers sat. Left · 2In mitigation, Mark Graffius KC invited the judge to infer that his client was subject to ongoing exploitation up to the offence, and Nneka Akudolu KC said her client was sorry and had been told the restaurant would be empty.

Left · 2The teenagers denied the offences but were convicted after a six-week trial earlier this year; one had pleaded guilty to failing to disclose a PIN, and the third person was not part of the trial or sentencing.

Every sentence links to the reporting it rests on. The pill in front of each says where its sources sit: Left, Centre or Right when one side supplies at least half of them, Mixed when they are evenly split. The number is how many outlets it cites.

Left2 outlets

Framing
Both outlets lead with the sentencing and the victims' suffering, relying heavily on the prosecutor's and judge's words and victim statements.
Emphasis
Severity of burns, planning and professionalism of the attack, the judge's "cold blood" remark.
Leaves out or plays down
Neither gives the defendants' names or any detail on the unidentified older figure.
Charged language
“Cold-blooded”“agonising burns”“set diners on fire”
For example
“Teens arsonists held door shut while customers suffered 'agonising burns' at London Indian restaurant” — Daily Mirror
“‘Cold-blooded’ teens who set diners on fire in restaurant arson attack jailed” — Metro

Centre0 outlets

No centre outlet in our sources has covered this story yet.

Right0 outlets

No right outlet in our sources has covered this story yet.