Teenager given criminal behaviour order apologises after TikTok ‘prank’
Bacari-Bronze O’Garro, 18, known as Mizzy, said he would describe his actions as ‘having fun’.
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.A teenager who was issued with a criminal behaviour order and fined hundreds of pounds after entering a home as part of a TikTok “prank” video has apologised.
Bacari-Bronze O’Garro, 18, known as Mizzy, of Manor Road, Hackney, London, described his actions as “having fun” but said he “felt bad” and therefore apologised.
He appeared at Thames Magistrates’ Court on Wednesday where he admitted to one count of failing to comply with a community protection notice.
Speaking on Piers Morgan Uncensored on TalkTV, the teenager said: “I wouldn’t call it terrorising, I would more call it having fun.
“But let me get this out of the way first, I apologise. You see this situation that blew up on the internet, like walking into random houses, the next day I apologised because I felt bad.”
Varinder Hayre, prosecuting, told the court that O’Garro was issued with a community protection notice on May 11 last year, and that two of its conditions were that he not trespass on to private property.
Ms Hayre said that he then breached that notice by entering a home on May 15 this year.
“He went to the home address of the victim,” she said.
“The door of the property was open.
“Mr O’Garro walked into the property and immediately walked down the stairs.
“He was stopped by the home owner.
“He went into the living room. He sat down on the sofa and said ‘Is this where the study group is?'”
He has caused the family a lot of distress
Ms Hayre said: “He was asked to leave multiple times by both the victim and the husband.”
She added: “It was discovered that he had filmed the entire incident for a TikTok trend about walking into random houses.”
Ms Hayre said: “He has caused the family a lot of distress.
“The faces of the couple and their two young children can be seen.”
She told the court that the mother was under the impression that O’Garro was attempting burglary, and added that the mother takes her family’s privacy “very seriously”.
“This has caused the victim great concern,” Ms Hayre said.
Lee Sergent, in mitigation, said that O’Garro had apologised to the family.
He said that his client was raised by a single parent and had a difficult upbringing.
“Mr O’Garro grew up in a single parent household,” Mr Sergent said.
“He had an extremely difficult childhood.
“He is an intelligent young man and a young man with some potential.”
He said that his client was neither in work nor education, but was instead in receipt of Universal Credit.
Mr Sergent added that his client had made some legitimate social media content, including playing games and discussing conspiracy theories.
Judge Charlotte Crangle issued O’Garro with a two-year criminal behaviour order.
The order included that O’Garro must not directly or indirectly post videos on to social media without the documented consent of the people featured in the content, that he must not trespass into private property, and that he must not attend the Westfield Centre in Stratford.
She also ordered O’Garro to pay a fine of £200, as well as a victim surcharge of £80 and costs of £85 – totalling £365.