Arsenal fan handed ban for racially abusing midfielder Thomas Partey

Charles Ogunmilade told police that his post on X was intended to be sarcastic

Thomas Partey (Mike Egerton/PA) (PA Archive)

An Arsenal fan has received a three-year football banning order after racially abusing midfielder Thomas Partey, despite claiming he was mimicking what a white racist would say as satire.

Charles Ogunmilade, 28, previously admitted posting a “grossly offensive” message on X, formerly Twitter, attacking the Gunners player for missing a goal during the team’s 3-3 draw with Southampton on April 21 last year.

Partey sent a shot over the crossbar, and the court heard Ogunmilade posted the abuse.

Suleman Hussain, prosecuting, said the post was reported to police.

When officers attended his address, he said Ogunmilade appeared “dumbfounded”.

“The defendant appeared stunned and (the officers) could see he was afraid because his eyes had widened and his eyebrows became arched and became dumbfounded,” the prosecutor said.

He added that Ogunmilade told police that the post was intended to be a sarcastic quote within a friendship group.

“He said the group would mimic what a white racist would say,” he said.

Ogunmilade, who is of Nigerian descent, represented himself.

In mitigation, he told the court that he and his friends had been affected by the racism directed at England’s black players after the team’s loss in the Euro 2020 final.

“Our coping mechanism was to make fun of it, to limit the power these people have over you,” he said.

He added he was concerned about how a banning order, which would require him to surrender his passport to police every time England played an away game, could impact his career – including travelling to the US – as well as visiting his family in Nigeria.

“I am not a racist person,” he said.

Magistrate Shaoni Myer said the panel had taken into account Ogunmilade’s early guilty plea, his previous good character, his personal circumstances, his experience of racism, and his intention for the post to be satire.

He was ordered to pay a fine of £125, a surcharge of £50 and an £85 contribution to the prosecution’s costs.

“We really have no choice,” she said.

“Giving you a conditional discharge would not be appropriate.”