Britain's "Political Prisoners" A Year On—Where Are the Non-Violent Southport Protestors Now?
Updates on the most aggressive speech crackdown modern Britain has seen.
It’s been about a year since the non-violent Southport protestors were arrested, prosecuted, and sentenced en masse after the unrest that followed the brutal murders of Elsie Stancombe, Bebe King, and Alice da Silva Aguiar.
To understand the level of fury, you have to understand what happened to those girls. They weren’t just murdered. They were butchered—at a Tayor Swift-themed yoga and dance workshop of all places.
Elsie was stabbed 85 times, Bebe 122 times, and Alice 4 times. The attack defied belief, so savage, so senseless, that even those reading about it were left simultaneously seething and stunned.
It broke the nation.
In the days that followed, outrage erupted. Thousands of Brits expressed shock, grief, and fury, likely in a bid to understand what happened.
Some assumed the murderer was an asylum seeker, after online rumours spread. He wasn’t. He was a second-generation immigrant from Rwanda.
Others made no such assumption. They expressed broader concerns, about safety, about immigration, about the state’s failure to stop now-convicted child murderer Axel Rudakubana.
But as soon as Brits took to the streets to protest, the crackdown began.
Accusations of “two-tier policing” quickly emerged.
One protestor testified that, for posting on Facebook, officers aggressively arrested him at home, threatened him with a maximum prison sentence, and denied him the right to a phone call.
Elsewhere, the CPS published a false statement about another protestor, alleging she had said she disliked immigrants. She said no such thing. The CPS later corrected the claim, despite the fact she ran a childminding business, hosting children from migrant backgrounds.
Police arbitrarily kettled protesters and arrested them. During one protest-turned-riot in Whitehall, the Metropolitan Police detained one peaceful protester for nearly 21 hours, yet has since released violent individuals, such as Mussa Kadri, on bail hours later, though his offence was unrelated to the civil unrest.
Compare this also to Staffordshire Police’s handling of the men of Middle Eastern ancestry who patrolled the streets of Hanley, Stoke-on-Trent, in masks, visibly carrying offensive weapons.
Rather than kettle or arrest them, officers failed even to conduct basic searches, despite the fact that carrying an offensive weapon in public carries a maximum prison sentence of four years.
Instead of confiscating the weapons, an officer told the men to hand them in—not to the police—but to the local Darul Falah mosque.
Certain police conduct, or rather misconduct, towards the Southport protestors seemingly amounted to clear coercion, though UK law does not always view it as such. One has to categorically demonstrate that a suspect’s free will has been undermined.
Then came the claims of “two-tier prosecuting”.
Unlike white working-class suspects, The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) and police forces failed to charge and prosecute certain minorities for racially aggravated offences during the unrest.
Authorities add aggravating offences to existing charges if they appear to motivated by xenophobia, often resulting in harsher sentences.
In Middlesbrough, for example, the CPS did not charge Ameer Khalile with racially aggravated public disorder after he chased a man, stamped on his head, and shouted “white racist scum.”
Similar occurred in Birmingham. Amar Hussain attacked a pub-goers while seeking “far-right” groups, leaving Sean McDonagh with a lacerated liver. The CPS and West Midlands Police did not charge him with racial aggravation.
Meanwhile, Attorney General Lord Richard Hermer, a long-time friend and former donor to Sir Keir Starmer with historical links to Hope Not Hate, personally signed off on prosecutions en masse under the Public Order Act 1986 for inciting racial or religious hatred, as is required by law.
It was an unprecedented move that sidelined legislation normally used to prosecute speech, such as Section 127 of the Communications Act 2003 and Sections 179 and 181 of the Online Safety Act 2023.
The main difference between these bits of legislation? Section 19 of the Public Order Act imposes a maximum seven-year sentence, the harshest penalty, while the other laws set maximums of 12 months and two years, respectively.
In short, authorities used the wider context of violence, without proving certain individuals caused or spread it, to seek the harshest penalties.
Then we come to the allegations of “two-tier sentencing”.
Certain members of the judiciary gave non-violent protesters harsher sentences than violent Black Lives Matter (BLM) rioters in 2020.
Jonathan Daley, for example, drop-kicked a Metropolitan Police officer during civil unrest, pleaded guilty to violent disorder under the Public Order Act 1986, like many non-violent protesters, but received a 20-month suspended sentence.
Or consider Shayden Spencer, who threw metal fence sections at fleeing police officers, pleaded guilty to violent disorder but received another suspended sentence and was bailed before sentencing, highlighting inconsistent remand procedure too.
Judges also did not lecture BLM rioters on “diversity”, smear them as “bigots” in open court, or subjectively speculate on their intent or the effects of their actions to the extent that they did for the Southport protestors.
The real kicker?
All of this occurred in a vacuum where our Prime Minister, Sir Keir Starmer, stood at the Downing Street podium and smeared protestors “far-right thugs” while pushing for rapid sentencing to “deter” further unrest.
A His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Fire and Rescue Services (HMICFRS) report later investigating the causes found that, far from being “the far-right,” most protestors were locals, voicing a wide range of reasons for taking to the streets.
It is true that Starmer doesn’t have direct control over police or the courts. But he has leverage to encourage certain action. And he did.
He arguably prejudiced cases before they began and during, creating a climate in which harsh police tactics—denial of bail, denial of phone calls, publishing categorically false statements about protestors’ comments—manifested.
And it isn’t over. Ten days ago, we heard that Merseyside, Greater Manchester, Cleveland, Northumbria and Avon and Somerset police are still hunting suspected protestors and rioters.
According to data from the Crown Prosecution Service, 821 defendants out of 859 were convicted by the end of March this year and a new website is being set up with details of 40 suspects still wanted.
To be clear: there is no doubt certain non-violent protestors incited violence. Many would argue such should be punished. You can’t have people calling for overt, imminent, and credible violence in civilised society.
The question is, does the punishment fit the crime?
Given that materially violent offenders received suspended prison sentences while the vast, vast majority of Southport protestors didn’t—in same the context of civil unrest and guilty pleas—it seems not.
Progressive lawyers will likely argue that personal mitigation and case complexity primarily cause such disparities.
It's true to some extent. UK laws allow judges considerable discretion in sentencing, which partially accounts for the variations.
However, the difference in sentences between the Southport protesters alone is cause enough for concern (as you'll see below).
Accepting guilty pleas, for context, is not something judges have to do. They can reject them for a number of different reasons. For the “far-right” white working classes, it seems, that simply wasn’t or couldn’t be on the table.
Now, what follows are short summaries of non-violent Southport protesters, detailing their actions, charges, pleas, bail conditions, sentences, judicial remarks, and current status (whether they’re still in prison or not).
Some reports lack detail, with police having removed certain reports from websites, the judiciary withholding most protesters’ sentencing remarks, and some media outlets entirely ignoring cases.
So where there’s inconsistent information that’s because it isn’t readily available and could take months to obtain. In any case, I hope you’ll find this insightful or useful as an archive.
Lucy Connolly - Childminder and Mother
Lucy, 41, posted on X the day of the heinous murders, stating she “did not care” if asylum seeker hotels were set alight. The tweet was deleted within four hours. There was no explicit incitement—stating you do not care if violence occurs is very different to directly calling for it.
She was prosecuted under Section 19 of the Public Order Act 1986, for "intending" or being "likely" to stir up racial hatred. The offence carries a maximum sentence of seven years.
Reports contradict each other on the timeline but it is certain she was held on remand before entering a plea and before being sentenced.
Notably, the CPS misrepresented her police interview, claiming she said she “didn’t like immigrants”. They later corrected the statement on their website after Lucy’s mother challenged them.
She eventually pleaded guilty in the hope of securing a reduced sentence and returning home to care for her husband, who is reported to be suffering from blood cancer and bone marrow failure, and daughter.
Judge Melbourne Inman KC used his sentencing remarks to lecture her on the importance of “diversity” and sentenced her to 31 months in prison.
She is to serve 40% of her sentence, equating to over 12 months. She remains in prison. Authorities are expected to release her later this month.
Peter Lynch - Packaging Industry Worker and Grandfather
Peter, 61, attended the protest-turned-riot outside an “asylum seeker” hotel in Rotherham, carrying a homemade placard labelling politicians as “corrupt.” At one point, shouted at police: “You are protecting people who are killing our kids and raping them.”
His most confrontational moment came when he stood still as police advanced. After being struck with a riot shield, he pushed back and shouted “scum.”
He was charged with violent disorder, presumably under Section 2 of the Public Order Act 1986, which carries a maximum sentence of five years.
He pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 32 months in prison by Judge Jeremy Richardson KC, who described him as a “full participant” in a riot in which some individuals set fire to the hotel.
There was no evidence that Lynch committed any material violence apart from the momentary push, which could be argued to have been defensive.
Two months into his sentence, he reportedly took his own life. He suffered from diabetes, thyroid issues, angina, and had recently suffered a heart attack, raising concern about whether he was fit to serve a custodial sentence.
Had he lived, he would likely have been released in May 2026.
Jamie Michael - Former Royal Marine Commando and Father
Jamie, 45, posted a Facebook video encouraging people to “peacefully” assemble and protest mass immigration. The video included a single reference to a mosque. There was no categorically no incitement.
He was prosecuted under Section 19 of the Public Order Act 1986 for “stirring up racial hatred,” carrying a maximum sentence of seven years.
In a subsequent interview, he claims he was aggressively handcuffed, threatened with a maximum sentence, and denied his right to make a phone call when detained.
He was held on remand until his initial hearing after pleading not guilty. The Free Speech Union later secured bail ahead of his trial. When the case went to court, the jury took just 17 minutes to acquit him.
Despite being cleared, he claims he lost around 30% of his business, was “slandered” by the mainstream press, and was suspended from driving the local school football team to matches, a voluntary role he had held for three years.
Berndette Spofforth - Businesswoman and Mother
Bernadette, 55, speculated online about the then-Southport suspect, sharing the identity "Ali Al-Shakati" on X. The post included no incitement, and no calls for violence. In fact, she even prefaced it with the words: “If this is true.”
Cheshire Police arrested her on suspicion of committing an offence under Section 19 of the Public Order Act 1986 and Section 179 of the Online Safety Act, which pertains to intentional false communications.
She was held in custody for a reported 36 hours before being released.The Crown Prosecution Service later confirmed that there was insufficient evidence to bring charges.
According to Bernadette, the ordeal left her deeply shaken. She also stated that her reputation had been destroyed. There are reports that she is currently pursuing legal action against Cheshire Police.
Daffron Williams - Veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan
Daffron, 41, posted a series of allegedly “anti-Islamic” messages on Facebook. The most contentious read: “I am racist as f***, only to those who sap the life out of society and disrespect culture. Our future as British is so uncertain it is unreal.”
Another post featured an AI-generated image of a child dressed as a medieval knight, standing beside a lion and holding a sword. The caption read: “Time to wake up the lion to save our children’s future.”
The CPS prosecuted him under Section 19 of the Public Order Act 1986 for “stirring up racial hatred.” He pleaded guilty and was held on remand after his arrest.
Judge Tracy Lloyd-Clarke sentenced him to 30 months in prison, with half to be served in custody and the remainder on licence. While at HMP Swansea, he was required to complete a dystopian-sounding diversity “education” module.
He remains in prison, with an expected release date around November this year.
Wayne O’Rourke - Social Media Influencer
Wayne, 35, posted “anti-Muslim and anti-establishment rhetoric” on X. The most controversial post featured an image of a burning car during the Sunderland unrest, accompanied by the caption: “Sunderland, go on lads.”
This was one of the closer examples of overt incitement.
He was prosecuted under Section 19 of the Public Order Act 1986 for “stirring up racial hatred.” After initially failing to enter a plea, he later pleaded guilty. It is believed he was held on remand after his arrest.
Judge Catarina Sjolin Knight sentenced Wayne to 36 months in prison, claiming that he had “instigated” some of the violence, though there was no material evidence that he directly caused any.
He remains in prison and is reportedly due for release on 23rd October 2025.
David Spring - Retired Train Driver
David, 61, attended a protest in Whitehall on 31 July. Reports state that during the event, he swore at police officers, allegedly shouting “fking wer”, “c***”, and “who the f*** is Allah”. However, he did not engage in any material violence.
Reports have since alleged that the Metropolitan Police arrested individuals under a dispersal order before any violence broke out. One attendee has revealed they did so before the dispersal order came into effect.
David was prosecuted under Section 2 of the Public Order Act 1986 for violent disorder, an offence carrying a maximum sentence of five years. He pleaded guilty. It is not known whether he was held on remand prior to sentencing.
He was sentenced to 18 months in prison by Judge Benedict Kelleher, despite informing the court of his responsibility to care for his wife, who suffers from pneumonia.
The judge claimed he “encouraged others to engage in disorder,” although no evidence was presented to support this interpretation. The defendant told the court he had attended the protest to oppose migrant hotels.
The harsh sentence appeared again to rest on yet another subjective interpretation of intent. He is presumed to remain in custody, with his release due soon.
Alex Smith
Alex attended the same protest in Whitehall as David and refrained from participating in any violence or incitement. He remained on the sidelines throughout, observing events as they unfolded.
Despite his passive presence, officers from the Metropolitan Police arrested him after they issued a dispersal order instructing protestors to vacate the area by a set time. It is alleged they did so before the order came into effect.
There were no mainstream media reports covering his arrest. He was detained for nearly 21 hours, never interviewed, and ultimately never charged with any offence.
Alex later took legal action against the Met and successfully sued for them misconduct.
Tyler Kay - Former IT Worker and Father-of-Three
Tyler, 26, posted on X in protest over Lucy Connolly’s arrest, repeating the statement including: “Mass deportation now, set fire to all the f****** hotels full of the b****** for all I care… if that makes me racist, so be it.”
He advised others on how to avoid police detection: “That’s 100% the plan, plus gloves. No car either so no number plates to travel and a change of clothes nearby.”
He also appeared to suggest a time and location for a protest outside an immigration solicitor’s office in Northampton, which didn’t materialise.
The CPS prosecuted Tyler under Section 19 of the Public Order Act 1986 for stirring up racial hatred. He was held on remand from the point of charge and pleaded guilty.
Judge Adrienne Lucking sentenced him to 38 months in prison, just two days after his arrest. During her remarks, she claimed Tyler possessed a “fundamentally racist mindset,” despite his insistence that he was not racist.
He remains in prison. Under the terms of his sentence, 19 months are to be served in prison, with the remaining 19 on licence. He is still in prison and expected to be released around March 2026.
Julie Sweeney - Grandmother and Carer
Julie, 53, posted in a Facebook group in response to an image of individuals repairing the Southport mosque following the riots. The post read: “It’s absolutely ridiculous. Don’t protect the mosque. Blow the mosque up with the adults in it.”
It was arguably the most overt example of incitement seen during the fallout.
Curiously, rather than being prosecuted under hate speech legislation, she was charged under Section 181 of the Online Safety Act, an offence relating to “sending communications threatening death or serious harm”, carrying a maximum sentence of 5 years.
A somewhat strange development as her post came amid the unrest, which is what other judges cited as evidence when sentencing with other offenders charged under the Public Order Act.
She pleaded guilty and was remanded in custody prior to sentencing.
Judge Steven Everett sentenced her to 15 months in prison, stating she had “chosen to take part in stirring up hatred”, despite the legislation itself not specifying hate-related provisions.
She has likely been released or will be imminently.
Cameron Bell - Care Worker
Cameron, 23, livestreamed on TikTok following a riot in Staffordshire, during which several masked men were heard making “racist remarks”, which reportedly included calling asylum seekers “tramps”.
Bell reportedly told members of the group that they should visit other areas, comments later interpreted as contributing to the wider disorder. Even though it is not reported that she encourage people to be violent in those “other areas”.
She did not participate in any material violence, nor is she reported to have explicitly incited any.
Cameron was prosecuted for violent disorder under Section 2 of the Public Order Act 1986, which carries a maximum sentence of five years.
She pleaded guilty and was held on remand from the time of her arrest.
At sentencing, Judge John Edwards handed her a nine-month custodial sentence. He claimed her livestream “fanned the flames,” referred to the broader violence as “misplaced far-right sentiment,” and stated that “the need for deterrence [was] acute”.
She has since been released.
Mark Heath - Former Prison Officer
Mark, 45, repeated the claim on X that the Southport suspect was an asylum seeker named “Ali Al Shakati.”
In the same post, he described the horrific murders as a “tipping point” and added: “Those people now have blood on their hands, as they kept a dangerous killer in Britain.” He did not call for violence.
Despite this, he was prosecuted for stirring up racial hatred under Section 19 of the Public Order Act 1986. He pleaded not guilty, though there were allegations that he had been pressured into entering a guilty plea.
He was held on remand for a period after his arrest and reportedly attacked in jail by men reported to be of Middle Eastern ancestry, assumed by Heath to be members of a Muslim prison gang.
As one of the few to contest his charges, like Jamie Michael, he was later found not guilty by a jury of his peers and released.
Derek Heggie - Former Boxer
Derek, 41, posted two videos on YouTube in which he made what the court deemed “grossly offensive comments.”
These included referring to the Prophet Mohammad as a “paedophile” and linking mass immigration to increased sexual violence.
He was prosecuted under the Malicious Communications Act 1988 for sending communications of an offensive nature, a charge less severe than the Public Order Act offences used against other non-violent protestors.
The offence carries a maximum sentence of 12 months in prison if processed in the Magistrates’ court, which Derek was.
Initially pleading not guilty, Heggie later changed his plea. It also emerged during proceedings that he had 32 prior convictions, including assault of a police officer.
Judge Nicholas Barker sentenced him to 10 months in prison, claiming the content was intended to have “broad reach, and to be read and heard by many.” He added: “It is clear the messages were intended by you to be grossly offensive, particularly to those of a Muslim faith.”
Heggie was ordered to serve 40% of his sentence. He has already been released.
Bradley McCarthy - Father-of-Three
Bradley, 34, attended a protest-turned-riot on 3rd August in Bristol, where he was recorded shouting in the face of a police dog and allegedly “threatening” left-wing counter-protesters.
According to reports, he goaded counter-protestors, urging them to “cross the police line” which risked breaching the peace. He did not engage in any material violence.
He was initially arrested and released before later being re-arrested and charged with violent disorder under Section 2 of the Public Order Act 1986. His remand status remains unclear. He pleaded guilty.
It later surfaced that Bradley had prior convictions for violence, weapons, and public order offences.
Judge Julian Lambert sentenced him to 20 months in prison, stating: “you did all this in a tinderbox atmosphere where it only takes the actions of one person to spark very serious group violence.”
Bradley is likely still in prison but to be released soon.
Jordan Parlour
In early August, Jordan, 28, posted on Facebook: “every man and his dog should smash [the] f*** out of Britannia hotel (in Leeds),” alongside accusations that asylum seekers were unfairly exploiting the taxes of “hard-working people.”
While his post constituted overt incitement to violence, it was not directed at any specific individual, religious group, or ethnicity.
Although violence did occur after his post was made, there was no direct evidence linking the post to the damage at the hotel.
He was prosecuted under Section 19 of the Public Order Act 1986 for stirring up racial hatred. His remand status before his hearings is not known.
He pleaded guilty and was sentenced just three days later.
Judge Guy Kearl KC handed down a 20-month prison sentence, with half to be served in custody. During sentencing, the judge claimed that Parlour’s post had circulated “widely,” despite the post only being liked by six people.
Jordan has since been released.
James Aspin - Father-of-Four
James, 34, posted a nearly four-minute-long video on TikTok in which he made overt incitement to violence, stating: “we are going to burn down every fucking Mosque in Newcastle.”
He also made remarks about “Muslim Asians” and their perceived negative impact on the country. He later claimed he had been intoxicated when recording the video.
The CPS prosecuted James under the Public Order Act 1986 for stirring up religious hatred and he was held on remand following his arrest. He subsequently pleaded guilty.
Judge Carolyn Scott sentenced him to 20 months in prison, with half to be served in custody. During her sentencing remarks, she condemned James’s language, stating: “you spoke about asylum seekers in a despicable way.”
She added: “Such words could and do, on some occasions, result in action being taken by others which have a serious impact on the lives of other people.”
He is likely still in prison but to be released soon.
Daniel Kingsley - Plasterer and Father-of-Eight
Daniel, 33, posted a series of Facebook messages in the aftermath of the Southport child murders. One read: "We have had beheadings, now stabbings of kids – when will they learn?"
Another stated: "If you are going to riot today do it properly." Reports indicate that Daniel later deleted the posts himself and expressed remorse.
He was prosecuted under Section 19 of the Public Order Act 1986 for stirring up racial hatred. It is not known whether he was held on remand following his arrest. He pleaded guilty.
During sentencing, after Daniel denied being a racist, Judge Rhys Rowlands remarked, “they always do,” before almost astonishing branding him a “bigot”—a rather unbecoming comment for an impartial judge.
Rowlands sentenced him to 21 months in prison. Reports also noted that Daniel is the primary carer for his severely autistic son, as well as for his mother and stepfather.
He is likely still in prison, but due for release soon.
Joseph Haythorne - Engineer
Joseph, 26, posted the following message on X: “burn any hotels with those scruffy bastards in it.” The post remained online for just 17 minutes before it was deleted.
He was prosecuted under Section 19 of the Public Order Act 1986 for stirring up racial hatred. It is not known whether he was held on remand following arrest. Joseph pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 15 months’ imprisonment.
During the proceedings, it emerged that the Crown Prosecution Service had failed to obtain the necessary consent from the Attorney General prior to bringing the charges, a legal requirement for offences under Section 19.
Judge Jeremy Richardson KC characterised the failure as a “prosecution mistake” but allowed to the case proceed.
In his sentencing remarks, Judge Richardson claimed that “racism and racially motivated violence suffused the events at Rotherham from first to last.”
He further stated the incident was “part of wider national civil unrest fostered by a form of malignancy in society spread by malevolent users of social media,”.
The judge also referred to Tommy Robinson as a “far right” figure, as Joseph replied to one of the activist’s posts that was cited in the case.
Joseph is presumed to still be in prison but likely to be release soon.
Geraint Boyle - Father-of-Three
Geraint posted a series of messages on Facebook, including one stating he was “ready for war” and another showing an image of a mosque accompanied by the caption: “burn them all down with the bastards inside.”
It no doubt constituted overt incitement but wasn’t specified to any particular religion or ethnicity.
He was prosecuted under Section 19 of the Public Order Act 1986 for stirring up racial hatred and pleaded guilty almost immediately.
It later emerged that Boyle had previous convictions for both violent offences and breaches of public order.
During sentencing, Judge Tracey Lloyd-Clarke imposed a 24-month sentence, ordering that half be served in prison and the remainder on licence.
He is believed to still be in prison.
Aaron Johnson - YouTuber and Homeless Former Chef
Aaron livestreamed on YouTube outside a hotel in Stockport, during which he made a series of derogatory remarks about migrants.
He was reported to have told hotel staff he would “smash their face in,” and was also captured saying to a migrant, “Hello, are you enjoying the free food and free fing accommodation, yeah?” He later added: “These people get put fing first.”
No riot occurred outside the hotel Johnson attended. Curiously little detail about the incident was reported in the mainstream press.
He was prosecuted for stirring up racial hatred via the distribution of a recording under the Public Order Act 1986 and pleaded guilty. He was remanded into custody prior to sentencing.
Judge Maurice Greene, who had previously advised Johnson to obtain legal representation, sentenced him to two years in prison.
He is presumed to still be in prison but released soon.
Christopher Taggart
Christopher posted a series of Facebook messages, including: “Who’s up for a rally?” When another user asked, “What’s the rally all about?” he replied: “To get them gone. We don’t want them.”
In another, he added: “We don’t want them here. F*** ’em. They started, we will end it. All of this wouldn’t have happened if they shut the borders.”
Nothing he is reported to have posted amounted to overt incitement. Yet, Cheshire Police later arrested Taggart at his home, where they found a knuckleduster.
He was prosecuted for stirring up racial hatred under Section 19 of the Public Order Act 1986 and for possession of an offensive weapon in a private place. He pleaded guilty to both charges.
Taggart was sentenced to 32 months’ imprisonment and remains in prison.
Rhys McDonald
Rhys was charged, prosecuted, and sentenced alongside Christopher Taggart. In response to Christopher’s post, McDonald wrote: “It’s not about immigration, it’s about an ideology… Just happens to be that a lot of these immigrants prescribe to this ideology… It’s not really about immigration, it’s about radical Islam.”
In a separate post on 4th August, he wrote: “They need to protest at the hotels where these animals are living… No good in Liverpool city centre. Get to the Daresbury.”
While his posts contained no overt incitement, he was arrested at his home and prosecuted for stirring up racial hatred under the Public Order Act.
He pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 28 months’ imprisonment. He remains in prison.
Richard Williams - Metal Worker
Richard, 34, posted in a local Facebook group expressing his desire to take part in a “protest/riot” to “keep our kids safe.” He also shared a “derogatory meme about migrants”. Few other details about his conduct were reported.
He was charged within 24 hours and prosecuted for sending menacing messages via a public communications network, presumably under Section 127(1) of the Communications Act 2003, which carries a maximum sentence of up to six months.
He pleaded guilty and was sentenced to three months in prison.
During sentencing, Judge Stephen Harmes told Richard he was “a person who has little thought for others and the law,” adding, “you’re not a warrior, and neither are the rioters.”
He has since been released.
Megan Morrison
Megan shared an image on Facebook showing unrest outside a hotel in Rotherham that was housing asylum seekers. Alongside the image, she commented: “They should do this to the Cumberland Hotel. It’s full of them.”
She was prosecuted for stirring up racial hatred under the Public Order Act.
She pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 18 months in prison, with the custodial sentence of six months suspended. Instead, she was ordered to complete 160 hours of unpaid work and was given a two-month, electronically monitored nighttime curfew.
Judge Nicholas Barker, in a rare, measured, and more objective judgement, stated: “What you did was to demonstrate an implied assertion that you supported the actions that these mindless thugs were taking.”
Do you believe our best days lie ahead?
Will you keep watching as our politicians and broadcasters push for yet more surveillance, censorship, and control?
If you want to push back—if not today, maybe someday—supporting independent journalism can (genuinely) make a real impact.
In the past year, The Stark Naked Brief reached over 120 million people on X. Sometimes, all it takes is one post—one uncomfortable truth—to wake someone up and put a dent the uniparty’s monopoly.
Never plead guilty.
Grim reading...
A weak government desperately writing and re-writing the rules as the situations develop...
Prosecutions which imply intent on the part of those arrested...which would be defamation
if made by those not employed as law enforcement personnel...