Mike Amesbury, the Recall Process, and the Law: Clearing Up the Misinformation!

After correcting a major inaccuracy regarding prison sentences and eligibility for political office, we now address false claims about Mike Amesbury and the recall process that need urgent clarification.

By Jason King

Following on from our previous article about prison sentences and disqualification from political office, in which we corrected a major legal inaccuracy being widely misreported, we have uncovered another currently popular misconception that requires clarification.

This time, the false narrative circulating on social media is the claim that a recall petition can be triggered immediately following the conviction and sentencing of Mike Amesbury, who assaulted a constituent while he was the Labour MP for Runcorn and Helsby.

A recall petition at this stage is not legally possible.

As much as many of his constituents and political observers might want a recall process to begin right now, the law simply does not allow it until after his appeal has been concluded. Misinformation suggesting that action can be taken now is not only misleading but also fosters false hopes and misplaced outrage, distracting from the real legal and procedural facts of the case.

In this article, we will set the record straight.

This is not about political point-scoring, it’s about equipping people with the right information. We must ensure that fact prevails over fiction when discussing the law, democracy, and the accountability of elected officials.

The Legal Reality: Why Mike Amesbury Cannot Be Recalled Yet

Under the Recall of MPs Act 2015, an MP can be subjected to a recall petition under three specific circumstances:

1. If they receive a custodial prison sentence of 12 months or less (sentences of more than 12 months automatically trigger disqualification).

   
   

2. If they are suspended from the House of Commons for at least 10 sitting days (or 14 calendar days).

   
   

3. If they are convicted of providing false or misleading expenses claims.

   
   

Amesbury’s six-month custodial sentence (suspended for two years) does meet the threshold under point one. However, the crucial legal barrier is this:

The recall petition process cannot begin while an MP’s appeal against their sentence is still active.

This is a black-and-white legal rule—not a grey area, not open to interpretation. The recall process is put on hold until all appeals are exhausted.

This means that even if constituents want a petition immediately, it legally cannot begin until the appeal process has concluded. If Amesbury's appeal results in his sentence being overturned or reduced to a non-recallable level, there will be no recall petition at all.

The persistent claims on social media that the petition can be started now are simply false. They create false expectations and distort the legal and democratic processes that must be followed.

Now that we have clarified why recall is currently on hold, let’s examine the actual details of the case—without spin, without speculation, and with full transparency.

The Mike Amesbury Case: A Detailed Breakdown

The Mike Amesbury Case: A Detailed Breakdown:

The Assault and Investigation

The case against Mike Amesbury MP centres on an incident that occurred in the early hours of October 26, 2024. Amesbury was arrested and charged with assault by beating following an altercation at a taxi rank in Frodsham town centre, Cheshire.

• The victim, 45-year-old Paul Fellows, reported that Amesbury punched him in the head during a conversation about a local bridge closure, knocking him to the ground.

• CCTV footage of the incident showed no evidence of aggression or threats from Fellows prior to the assault.

• Amesbury continued to strike Fellows at least five more times before bystanders intervened.

Following the emergence of the footage, Amesbury was suspended from the Labour Party and now serves as an independent MP.

Based on the results of a police investigation, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) determined that there was sufficient evidence to prosecute, and Amesbury was charged with common assault.

The Trial and Sentencing

On January 16, 2025, Amesbury pleaded guilty at Chester Magistrates’ Court. In court, Amesbury expressed regret for his actions and offered an apology to Mr. Fellows and his family.

The court was informed that Amesbury had previously been the target of threats and harassment, including an attempted assault in 2019 and a stalking conviction against another individual in 2023.

The Sentence

On February 24, 2025, Amesbury was sentenced to 10 weeks in prison. He will serve four weeks in custody, with the remainder on licence.

The Controversy: Was Amesbury’s Sentence Too Light? The Comparisons to Riot Sentences

Some online commentators have compared Amesbury’s sentence to those handed down following the 2024 riots, arguing that he received a lenient punishment. However, this is an unfair comparison.

The riot cases involved violent disorder, arson, and burglary—offences that carry harsher penalties due to their impact on public order. Courts historically take a stricter approach during times of unrest to deter future riots.

Amesbury’s case was an isolated assault with a single victim, falling under a different legal framework. While his four weeks in custody may seem short compared to longer riot-related sentences, the comparison ignores fundamental legal differences between public disorder offences and common assault.

Amesbury’s Sentence - Was It Actually Harsh??

Under UK law, common assault carries a maximum sentence of six months. Sentencing guidelines divide offences into three categories:

• Category 1 (Most Severe) – Up to 26 weeks’ custody, usually for cases involving significant harm or weapons.

• Category 2 (Moderate Severity) – Typically a high-level community order, though short custodial sentences are possible.

• Category 3 (Least Severe) – Fine or low-level community order.

Amesbury’s case fell into Category 2, as:

• His attack involved multiple blows.

• The victim was on the ground when struck.

• He was intoxicated.

• His status as an MP made this a breach of public trust.

For a first-time offender with no previous convictions, a suspended sentence or community order is more common. The fact that he received immediate custody suggests that his public role played a major role in increasing the seriousness of his punishment.

Amesbury is arguing on appeal that the sentence was too severe. However, the court’s approach suggests that public confidence in elected officials influenced the decision to impose custody—making it clear that MPs are held to a higher standard of responsibility than the average citizen who may end up in a drunken altercation.

Therefore , Amesbury’s position as a sitting MP at the time of the offence introduced a crucial aggravating factor—breaching the public trust. While the offence itself did not legally warrant a custodial sentence, the optics and public interest in the case left the judge little choice but to impose the harshest possible penalty within the sentencing guidelines. In reality, his ten-week prison sentence was severe for this type of crime, reflecting the court’s duty to uphold public confidence in the justice system. The ruling was not an example of leniency, but rather a balancing act—ensuring a proportionate sentence while still holding a public official to a higher standard of accountability.

Following on from his sentencing and imprisonment, Amesbury has since lodged an appeal, arguing that the sentencing was too severe for the crime, Until this appeal is resolved, the recall petition remains legally on hold.

How the Recall Petition Actually Works

Once Amesbury’s appeal is concluded—assuming the sentence remains unchanged—the formal recall process can begin. Here’s how it works:

1. The Speaker of the House of Commons is notified that an MP meets the criteria for recall.

   
   

2. A recall petition is opened in the MP’s constituency.

   
   

3. Constituents have six weeks to sign the petition.

   
   

4. If 10% or more of eligible voters in the constituency sign, a by-election is triggered.

   
   

5. Amesbury would be allowed to stand in the by-election if he chooses.

   
   

This process is not automatic—it requires active participation from the electorate. If fewer than 10% of registered voters sign, Amesbury remains MP.

Given the controversy surrounding this case, it is highly likely that a petition would reach the required threshold if initiated. However, that cannot happen yet due to the ongoing appeal.

Conclusion: The Importance of Getting the Facts Right

The anger and frustration surrounding Mike Amesbury’s case are understandable. Many believe his actions were unbecoming of an MP and that he should be removed from office.

However, legal facts must take precedence over social media speculation.

• Yes, Amesbury’s sentence makes him eligible for recall—but only once his appeal is fully concluded.

  
  

• No, a recall petition cannot legally be started right now.

  
  

• Yes, if the sentence is upheld, the recall process will proceed as outlined by law.

  
  

We live in an era where misinformation spreads faster than facts. As journalists, our responsibility is to ensure accuracy and clarity—not to fuel baseless narratives or false hope.

For now, the only course of action for those who want Amesbury recalled is to wait for the appeal decision. Once that ruling is made, the legal and democratic mechanisms will take their course.

Until then, let’s ensure that fact, not fiction, drives the conversation.

Well, that’s all for now. But until our next article, please stay tuned, stay informed, but most of all, stay safe, and I’ll see you then.

By Jason King

Birmingham Desk

Video Production News