He reportedly claimed his remarks were directed at the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) and Zionism, not at Jewish people in general. This defence was dismissed by District Judge Tim Capstick, who described it as "disingenuous at best".
The Crown argued that Ben-Abdallah’s speech constituted antisemitic incitement, with prosecutor Ella Embleton stating it was "blood libel", a form of antisemitic rhetoric that has led to violence against Jewish communities throughout history.
Judge Capstick condemned the defendant's words as "extremely offensive and insulting".
He also rejected Ben-Abdallah's argument that the comments were directed only at Israel or Zionism, stating that his remarks were a clear attack on Jewish people at large.
The rally, which attracted up to 400 people on both sides of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, saw pro-Israel supporters also in attendance.
Ben-Abdallah’s speech included other shocking remarks, including allegations that Jews were "thieves", "cowards", and even "stealing Palestinians' dogs".
Following numerous complaints, West Yorkshire Police arrested Ben-Abdallah on May 18, 2024, at another pro-Palestinian rally.
During his police interview, he reportedly admitted to making the comments but continued to defend his actions, claiming that he was "fully entitled" to express his views. He further insisted his speech did not cause "harassment, alarm or distress".
However, in court, prosecutor Embleton highlighted that blood libel was a "serious form of antisemitism", one that has been used to justify persecution of Jewish communities for centuries.
Ben-Abdallah, giving evidence in his defence, insisted that his comments were never intended to target ordinary Jewish people.
He explained that he had Jewish friends and, as a Tunisian-born man, had never encountered the term "blood libel" before his police interview.
He maintained that his speech was intended to criticise the actions of the IDF, not to attack Jewish people.
Under cross-examination, Embleton asked Ben-Abdallah if he accepted that his words could be seen as blood libel. He responded firmly: "No, I do not accept that."
In his summing up, Judge Capstick rejected Ben-Abdallah’s claims of ignorance regarding the harmful history of blood libel, describing him as "an obviously educated man" with a "great knowledge of the conflict".
The judge stated that Ben-Abdallah's choice of words was "deliberate", aiming to incite hostility against Jewish people.
The judge concluded that the only available penalties were a fine or a conditional discharge, and fined Ben-Abdallah £400, in addition to £600 in costs.
