Kevin Rees has been jailed for 15 years after a homemade explosive device destroyed a ULEZ camera in Sidcup, south-east London, in December 2023. The sentence was imposed at the Old Bailey on 2 October, following his conviction earlier this year for causing an explosion likely to endanger life or cause serious damage to property.
Sentence follows January convictions
Rees, 64, was found guilty by a jury at Woolwich Crown Court on 28 January of the explosion offence and three counts of possessing prohibited weapons. The court imposed a total prison term of 15 years, followed by a further year on licence. The three-year sentences for the weapons counts are to run concurrently with the main sentence.
The judge determined that the explosion offence had a terrorism connection for sentencing purposes. That finding concerns the legal treatment of the offence; it does not alter the specific convictions returned by the jury. No one was physically injured in the blast.
Blast in a residential street
The device was placed beside a camera that had been installed earlier on 6 December 2023. It was a metal cylinder containing explosive powder. After the fuse was lit, the device exploded close to homes and passing traffic.
Cars and nearby properties were damaged. A van opposite the site was struck, a tyre on another vehicle was blown out, and shrapnel passed through a passing car and reached the base of a passenger seat. Damage was also recorded to a wall, porch, shed and Wendy house. A piece of metal travelled more than 100 metres and damaged a child’s bedroom window frame. The scale of the damage makes the absence of injury significant, but it should not be read as reducing the danger posed by the incident.
Evidence considered by the jury
The prosecution case centred on CCTV, forensic work and material recovered after Rees’s arrest on 18 December 2023. Footage traced a Smart car from Sidcup to Shuttle Close shortly after 6.20pm. A man carrying a bag was then seen walking towards the camera site; after the blast, the vehicle was recorded leaving the area.
Forensic examination identified black powder in the remains of the device. Searches of Rees’s home recovered substances capable of being used in low-explosive compositions, material indicating an interest in explosive chemicals, and three homemade stun guns. The prohibited-weapons convictions relate to those stun guns.
The jury also heard that the camera had already been cut down in a separate incident by another person. That earlier damage was not treated as part of Rees’s conduct. The case against him concerned the later placement and detonation of the explosive device.
Opposition to the scheme was not a defence
Investigators found social-media posts in which Rees criticised the ULEZ scheme and encouraged damage to cameras. He told the jury that he strongly opposed the scheme. The evidence presented at trial, however, established the offence beyond reasonable doubt, leading to the January convictions and the subsequent sentencing hearing.
The case draws a clear line between expressing opposition to a public policy and conduct that endangers people and property. ULEZ cameras are part of a road-charging system for vehicles that do not meet emissions standards. Whatever the strength of a person’s views about that system, the court outcome reflects the serious consequences of using an explosive device in a residential area.
What the outcome means
The immediate criminal proceedings have resulted in a custodial sentence and an additional licence period. The earlier camera-cutting incident remained separate from Rees’s case. For residents affected by the blast, the most concrete point is that the criminal case concerning the explosion has now moved from conviction to sentence, nearly three years after the device was detonated.
