Two pro-Palestine activists convicted of criminal damage after targeting Pablo Picasso’s masterpiece Motherhood at the National Gallery have avoided prison.
NHS worker Jai Halai, 25, and politics student Monday-Malachi Rosenfeld, 23, placed a poster showing a Gazan mother and child over the 125-year-old painting before pouring red paint onto the floor on October 9, 2024.
The pair were found guilty of criminal damage by a jury at Southwark Crown Court following a trial in July.
But Halai and Rosenfeld, both members of the direct action group Youth Demand, were spared jail today. Each was given a 12-month community order and ordered to complete 80 hours of unpaid work.
Sentencing them, Judge David Tomlinson said: ‘You both joined a protest group called Youth Demand. You staged an incident in front of a work of art called “Motherhood”.
‘For what turned out to be a very brief moment you fixed to the Picasso a modern image of a distressed mother and child.
‘You were attempting to raise awareness of the plight of innocent people and particularly mothers and young people in Gaza.’
‘It is agreed that you did not attempt to cause damage to the work of art or to the transparent covering and frame.’
The two activists walked into room 43 of the National Gallery just after midday and plastered a photograph of a Gazan mother clutching her child over the protective glass
Giving evidence earlier in the trial, Michael Willie, head of security and facilities at the National Gallery, earlier told jurors that no costs would have been incurred if not for paint poured on the floor
Footage played in court shows security guards unsuccessfully trying to pull the pair away from the painting as they unveiled the picture of the Palestinian mother.
They then poured water-based paint over the wooden flooring before chanting ‘Free Palestine’ as they were taken away from the gallery.
In another clip, the protesters were heard shouting: ‘The UK is complicit in genocide [in Palestine]. Women are giving birth without any medical attention.’
They also claimed that ’87 per cent’ of the public support an arms embargo on Israel and called for a ‘democratic revolution’.
The judge said that members of the public who were in the gallery were ‘herded out and their enjoyment of what was on display was curtailed’.
He admitted that ‘no heritage artwork was actually damaged’.
‘I have regard to your respective ages, you both being in your early twenties at the time of this offence,’ the judge said.
Toby Manhire, prosecuting, earlier said: ‘They deliberately targeted ‘Motherhood’, a painting by Pablo Picasso.
The pair covered Picasso’s ‘Motherhood’ painting in the National Gallery with a poster of a Gazan mother and child. They were both found guilty of criminal damage but were spared jail
‘It was specifically chosen and it was pre-planned owing to the striking similarity between that painting and the poster that was pasted on top.
‘They attempted to attach that poster to the front glass of the painting. Ms Rosenfeld poured her bottle of painting on the floor.
‘The defendants accepted that they acted politically.’
Laura O’Brien, defending, said: ‘Ms Rosenfeld told the court of how her upbringing was shaped by her Jewish faith and her artistic family, her mother being an artist.’
‘A combination of art and her faith and a desire to change the world led Ms Rosenfeld to becoming involved in this action, and it shaped the parameters she set for her involvement.’
‘This is not a case where there was destruction. This is not a case of permanent damage.’
Katie McFadden, for Halai, said: ‘I would highlight that Mr Halai had a conscientious motivation for taking part in this protest.’
Ms McFadden said that past bombing of Gaza had affected Halai.
The activists chanted ‘free Palestine’ as they were escorted out of the gallery
‘He explained how the images were burned into his brain.
‘He has been a law-abiding citizen and he is at a low risk of re-offending.’
Giving evidence earlier, Michael Willie, head of security and facilities at the National Gallery, told jurors no costs would have been incurred were it not for paint poured on the floor.
He said: ‘Paint was on the marble skirting, stanchion, rope barriers, and it was seeping into the sockets.’
Asked by prosecutor Toby Manhire how serious the damage is, he said: ‘Just staining in the grains of the marble, the mastic joint, we had to replace it in its entirety.
‘It is safe to assume [the paint] could be cleaned away enough to reopen the gallery.’
Asked if there was an ‘obvious case of permanent damage’, he said: ‘No, not at that point.’
But while the stunt was billed at £8,000 in total, just £271.59 was attributed to cleaning.
Ms McFadden said it was an ‘aesthetic decision’ to keep the National Gallery ‘looking fancy’.
Jurors heard four workers were paid £120 an hour that evening ‘putting the floor back as a result of the cleaning process that the gallery has undertaken.’
Mr Willie said the works were necessary to ‘ensure the Gallery was presentable to members of the public the next morning.’
He said the works included sanding down the flooring and giving it a new finish because otherwise there would be ‘patches’ left from the cleaning.
Jurors were told the National Gallery incurred £250.28 for ‘response costs’, being the ‘time taken to reopen the gallery.’
Ms O’Brien said the gallery would have been prepared to deal with such incidents with so many visitors every day, adding: ‘Things like that do happen in the National Gallery.’
Mr Willie said: ‘Not like that but you do get spillages, small ones.’
Halai, of Barnet, north London, and Rosenfeld, of Tower Hamlets, denied but were convicted of criminal damage.
